Miscellaneous Microdosing possibly overplayed, not as effective as macrodosing, or at all

[Deleted member 544906]

Several studies show that microdosing (LSD) is not placebo:

"LSD showed positive effects in the majority of observations by increasing positive mood (20 mcg), friendliness (5, 20 mcg), arousal (5 mcg), and decreasing attention loss (5, 20 mcg).

The negative effects are manifested by an increase in confusion (20 mcg) and anxiety (5, 20 mcg).

Psychedelic changes in waking consciousness were also present (10, 20 mcg).

Overall, the present study demonstrated selective and beneficial effects of low doses of LSD on mood and cognition in the majority of observations. The minimum dose of LSD at which subjective and performance effects are notable is 5 mcg and the most apparent effects were seen after 20 mcg."

Mood and cognition after administration of low LSD doses in healthy volunteers: A placebo controlled dose-effect finding study - The Beckley Foundation

Nadia R. P. W. Hutten, Natasha L. Mason, Patrick C. Dolder, Eef L. Theunissen, Friederike Holze, Matthias E. Liechti, Amanda Feilding, Johannes G. Ramaekers, and Kim P. C. Kuypers – First published 17th October, 2020 in European Neuropsychopharmacology – Link to article Abstract There is a...

www.beckleyfoundation.org

This other study (which also uses a placebo) concludes that LSD is effective as a painkiller especially at 20 mcg, a dosage that can also cause dissociative effects, derealization, depersonalization and amnesia:

"Separate contrasts indicated that LSD 10 µg slightly increased symptoms of derealization (p=0.027) as well as the total dissociation score (p=0.032). LSD 20 µg slightly increased symptoms of amnesia (p=0.002), depersonalization (p=0.001), derealization (p=0.002), and the total dissociation score (p<0.001), relative to placebo. Canonical correlation analysis indicated a significant association (F6,364=2.18, p=0.04, canonical r=0.25) between measures of dissociation and pain that explained about 6% of the total variance. The association suggested that increments in symptoms of dissociation are associated with increased pain tolerance and a decrease in subjective pain perception.

The current data consistently indicated that LSD 20 µg significantly reduced pain perception as compared with placebo, where as lower doses of LSD did not. LSD 20 µg significantly increased pain tolerance (i.e. immersion time) by about 20%, while decreasing the subjective levels of experienced painfulness and unpleasantness. Changes in pain tolerance and subjective pain perception induced by LSD 20 µg were of medium to large effect size and comparable in magnitude to those observed with the CPT after administration of opioids, such as oxycodone 20 mg (Cooper et al., 2012) and morphine 10–20 mg (Ravn et al., 2013) to healthy volunteers."

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

journals.sagepub.com

For those who say that those who don't take "real doses" don't have any balls, I find that really sad - and condescending - on a harm reduction forum. You may be forgetting that we are all different and that while some people are insensitive, and need heroic doses to "open up", there are very receptive people who can feel very small amounts. Personally, an ayahuasca experience destroyed me for several years, impossible to work, etc. So I benefit from a microdose (I can feel as little as 5 mcg and from 15 mcg, I am slightly high), or even a mini dose, but I will never take large doses again.

What is the point of taking something to hurt yourself?

 

[finitelifeform]

Several studies show that microdosing (LSD) is not placebo:

"LSD showed positive effects in the majority of observations by increasing positive mood (20 mcg), friendliness (5, 20 mcg), arousal (5 mcg), and decreasing attention loss (5, 20 mcg).

The negative effects are manifested by an increase in confusion (20 mcg) and anxiety (5, 20 mcg).

Psychedelic changes in waking consciousness were also present (10, 20 mcg).

Overall, the present study demonstrated selective and beneficial effects of low doses of LSD on mood and cognition in the majority of observations. The minimum dose of LSD at which subjective and performance effects are notable is 5 mcg and the most apparent effects were seen after 20 mcg."

Mood and cognition after administration of low LSD doses in healthy volunteers: A placebo controlled dose-effect finding study - The Beckley Foundation

Nadia R. P. W. Hutten, Natasha L. Mason, Patrick C. Dolder, Eef L. Theunissen, Friederike Holze, Matthias E. Liechti, Amanda Feilding, Johannes G. Ramaekers, and Kim P. C. Kuypers – First published 17th October, 2020 in European Neuropsychopharmacology – Link to article Abstract There is a...

www.beckleyfoundation.org

This other study (which also uses a placebo) concludes that LSD is effective as a painkiller especially at 20 mcg, a dosage that can also cause dissociative effects, derealization, depersonalization and amnesia:

"Separate contrasts indicated that LSD 10 µg slightly increased symptoms of derealization (p=0.027) as well as the total dissociation score (p=0.032). LSD 20 µg slightly increased symptoms of amnesia (p=0.002), depersonalization (p=0.001), derealization (p=0.002), and the total dissociation score (p<0.001), relative to placebo. Canonical correlation analysis indicated a significant association (F6,364=2.18, p=0.04, canonical r=0.25) between measures of dissociation and pain that explained about 6% of the total variance. The association suggested that increments in symptoms of dissociation are associated with increased pain tolerance and a decrease in subjective pain perception.

The current data consistently indicated that LSD 20 µg significantly reduced pain perception as compared with placebo, where as lower doses of LSD did not. LSD 20 µg significantly increased pain tolerance (i.e. immersion time) by about 20%, while decreasing the subjective levels of experienced painfulness and unpleasantness. Changes in pain tolerance and subjective pain perception induced by LSD 20 µg were of medium to large effect size and comparable in magnitude to those observed with the CPT after administration of opioids, such as oxycodone 20 mg (Cooper et al., 2012) and morphine 10–20 mg (Ravn et al., 2013) to healthy volunteers."

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

journals.sagepub.com

For those who say that those who don't take "real doses" don't have any balls, I find that really sad - and condescending - on a harm reduction forum. You may be forgetting that we are all different and that while some people are insensitive, and need heroic doses to "open up", there are very receptive people who can feel very small amounts. Personally, an ayahuasca experience destroyed me for several years, impossible to work, etc. So I benefit from a microdose (I can feel as little as 5 mcg and from 15 mcg, I am slightly high), or even a mini dose, but I will never take large doses again.

What is the point of taking something to hurt yourself?

Drug harm reduction is not a concrete thing. When you are talking about drug use there isnt such a thing as the perfect way. Drug harm reduction if anything, from what I know, seeks for no drug use at all let alone a microdose. If we want to be absolutists what you are inferring contradicts the philosophy of what drug harm reduction has always been about - not taking drugs AT ALL, and if taking them knowing what that entails as best as possible.

Also, many people in reality verge over the boundaries. I see drug use like religion. It doesnt matter how much you practice religion, you are still seeking to cleanse yourself of your sins anyway. You are always repenting. There is no such thing as a perfect follower/worshipper of religion and those that are you will find are tucked away in monasteries renounced of their responsibilities to society. These are not your average people. Likewise with drug harm reduction, you wont find many who are "clean" enough in their life to say they are the perfect representation for what drug use looks like.

People are here to express their own beliefs, not solely the beliefs of an ideology that doesnt belong to them but a set of shared beliefs and collectively agreed upon truths that belong to an academic/institutional/scientific system. Drug harm reduction is all those things at its core. And here you find people who take drugs and not necessarily people who are paid to regurgitate what they were taught and what they preach to others in their work.

I think what is being referred to is the classical heavy experience from psychedelics. This has always been a staple of psychedelic/shamanistic culture for a long time. The idea of blowing yourself into other dimensions, or at least potentially far enough away to "reset" and come back refreshed and full of insight into your life. Today there is a merging with new approaches to psychedelic usage, mainly focusing on targeting new audiences and opening the door for a wider scope in the area of psychedelic science. Call it a culture clash maybe? I dont know. But there is a meeting of two worlds, one old and one new. There is bound to be lots of deep feelings, beliefs and potentially even defense for the preservation of this phenomena, especially when it pertains to what has generally always been considered the "only" way. Things change. Lots is changing in our world. In order to merge these two worlds (or perhaps as many worlds as there are if more are missed out) understanding and acceptance of difference of these landscapes in these worlds is necessary

Before long theres going to be lots of newer approaches to therapeutic medicines. It wont be long before most drugs now considered dangerous will be used therapeutically; shrooms, LSD, ayahuasca, MDMA, ibogaine etc. There will be a side that takes the old school route based on decades of modern cultural influences and ancient practices, and a side that takes the new therapeutic approach which focuses on using as little as possible of material to illicit therapeutic outcomes using new systems, styles etc.

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

i like a quarter hit of acid sometimes

 

[G_Chem]

Several studies show that microdosing (LSD) is not placebo:

"LSD showed positive effects in the majority of observations by increasing positive mood (20 mcg), friendliness (5, 20 mcg), arousal (5 mcg), and decreasing attention loss (5, 20 mcg).

The negative effects are manifested by an increase in confusion (20 mcg) and anxiety (5, 20 mcg).

Psychedelic changes in waking consciousness were also present (10, 20 mcg).

Overall, the present study demonstrated selective and beneficial effects of low doses of LSD on mood and cognition in the majority of observations. The minimum dose of LSD at which subjective and performance effects are notable is 5 mcg and the most apparent effects were seen after 20 mcg."

Mood and cognition after administration of low LSD doses in healthy volunteers: A placebo controlled dose-effect finding study - The Beckley Foundation

Nadia R. P. W. Hutten, Natasha L. Mason, Patrick C. Dolder, Eef L. Theunissen, Friederike Holze, Matthias E. Liechti, Amanda Feilding, Johannes G. Ramaekers, and Kim P. C. Kuypers – First published 17th October, 2020 in European Neuropsychopharmacology – Link to article Abstract There is a...

www.beckleyfoundation.org

This other study (which also uses a placebo) concludes that LSD is effective as a painkiller especially at 20 mcg, a dosage that can also cause dissociative effects, derealization, depersonalization and amnesia:

"Separate contrasts indicated that LSD 10 µg slightly increased symptoms of derealization (p=0.027) as well as the total dissociation score (p=0.032). LSD 20 µg slightly increased symptoms of amnesia (p=0.002), depersonalization (p=0.001), derealization (p=0.002), and the total dissociation score (p<0.001), relative to placebo. Canonical correlation analysis indicated a significant association (F6,364=2.18, p=0.04, canonical r=0.25) between measures of dissociation and pain that explained about 6% of the total variance. The association suggested that increments in symptoms of dissociation are associated with increased pain tolerance and a decrease in subjective pain perception.

The current data consistently indicated that LSD 20 µg significantly reduced pain perception as compared with placebo, where as lower doses of LSD did not. LSD 20 µg significantly increased pain tolerance (i.e. immersion time) by about 20%, while decreasing the subjective levels of experienced painfulness and unpleasantness. Changes in pain tolerance and subjective pain perception induced by LSD 20 µg were of medium to large effect size and comparable in magnitude to those observed with the CPT after administration of opioids, such as oxycodone 20 mg (Cooper et al., 2012) and morphine 10–20 mg (Ravn et al., 2013) to healthy volunteers."

SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals

Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

journals.sagepub.com

For those who say that those who don't take "real doses" don't have any balls, I find that really sad - and condescending - on a harm reduction forum. You may be forgetting that we are all different and that while some people are insensitive, and need heroic doses to "open up", there are very receptive people who can feel very small amounts. Personally, an ayahuasca experience destroyed me for several years, impossible to work, etc. So I benefit from a microdose (I can feel as little as 5 mcg and from 15 mcg, I am slightly high), or even a mini dose, but I will never take large doses again.

What is the point of taking something to hurt yourself?

While apologize for being a bit harsh, I’d also argue the studies your providing are “low dose.”

They found anxiety at doses of 5ug, psychedelic headspace at 10ug, and confusion at 20ug. That doesn’t really sound like the non perceptible micro dose people talk of (also shows most people get weak dose.)

If we really want to go down the harm reduction path too, what’s safer with drugs known to hit 5ht2b and cause nasty heart issues with continued use? A once in awhile heavy experience that brings new insights, possibly changes your life trajectory. Or many more small experiences that don’t ever reach that level, and typically used for more superficial things as evidenced by the articles on it. You know to be a better worker bee seems to be the main objective in many I read.

I take enough drugs hitting 5ht2b where I don’t need to be lightly tickling that bitch every day or couple of days.

-GC

 

[pupnik]

good for you!

each person is different - sort of.

I was surprised that 3 very close people that I have helped to microdose felt it made them more nervous, but one of them worked with it anyway for a few months and enjoyed her results at work immensely, she later shifted to mushrooms.

 

[Xorkoth]

I prefer mushroom microdoses actually, there is a more profound mood lift. LSD microdoses involve more stimulation. Both are nice, but mushrooms don't keep me up. Even microdoses of LSD affect my sleep.

 

[Deleted member 521610]

I prefer mushroom microdoses actually, there is a more profound mood lift. LSD microdoses involve more stimulation. Both are nice, but mushrooms don't keep me up. Even microdoses of LSD affect my sleep.

when do you take the LSD microdose. When i was microdosing i was taking them at 9 am i was sleeping by midnight.

 

[Deleted member 544906]

Drug harm reduction is not a concrete thing. When you are talking about drug use there isnt such a thing as the perfect way. Drug harm reduction if anything, from what I know, seeks for no drug use at all let alone a microdose. If we want to be absolutists what you are inferring contradicts the philosophy of what drug harm reduction has always been about - not taking drugs AT ALL, and if taking them knowing what that entails as best as possible.

I think you are confusing prevention and harm reduction. Reducing the risks usually involves using drugs. For example: it is better not to take heroin, but if you do take it, it is better to avoid the injection. If you decide to inject, it is better to use a single-use syringe and not share it, ...

What I meant was that on a forum that promotes harm reduction, encouraging people to take high doses of psychedelics without knowing the sensibility person is not very safe.

If we really want to go down the harm reduction path too, what’s safer with drugs known to hit 5ht2b and cause nasty heart issues with continued use? A once in awhile heavy experience that brings new insights, possibly changes your life trajectory. Or many more small experiences that don’t ever reach that level, and typically used for more superficial things as evidenced by the articles on it. You know to be a better worker bee seems to be the main objective in many I read.

I take enough drugs hitting 5ht2b where I don’t need to be lightly tickling that bitch every day or couple of days.

GC, you are quite right to clarify this point concerning the regularity of microdoses and the potential risks associated with heart valves and activation of 5-ht2b receptors. I should have specified that in my case, I do not use the model proposed by Fadiman. I tried but LSD becomes a vulgar stimulant in my case. On the contrary, if I space the doses for at least 7 days (15 days it's better), I feel this typical headspace of acid, but all in lightness. It probably looks more like a mini dose to me, it's true.

I prefer mushroom microdoses actually, there is a more profound mood lift. LSD microdoses involve more stimulation. Both are nice, but mushrooms don't keep me up. Even microdoses of LSD affect my sleep.

For me, the mushrooms were too anxiety-provoking and I had really weird dreams. It's true that LSD (unless you take it very early and go to bed late, as TripSitterNZ points out) can be more stimulating and disrupt sleep. I switched to 1CP, I find the duration shorter and I have no problem sleeping afterwards.

 

[Jabberwocky]

I'm a druggie and noticed a difference with shroom capsules. Nothing major of course. I wonder if they'd help with my current insomnia.

oh I'm not saying they may not provide a benefit for some

But for me, they didn't, or I wasn't able to appreciate it - but I never really experiment that much

 

[youarethebest]

nice good story well put I like the mushroom part

 

[Ismene2]

i like a quarter hit of acid sometimes

Yes just before you take the other 5 tabs 10 minutes later

 

[finitelifeform]

@anti_MK the aim of drug harm reduction is to not take drugs. What confuses people about drug harm reduction is;
Why would they be conveying to me the message its okay to take drugs and giving me advice on my taking drugs.

The reason is fairly simple. Drug policy is a failure because we have created a system that acts like the authoritarian parent punishing people for what is a natural and very human thing to do. It is not rational and does not accomodate for meaningful debate and laying down of beneficial foundations. This is why for a very long time, drug use was for most people a very dark area that came with a lot of stigma. All the while, there was no help around at all, or very very little. I can remember as a child we had a freephone sex advice number but we didnt have support for drugs. Funnily enough, we were all getting high but very few of us getting laid! The ensuing fallout breeds demonisation, discrimination, violence, black markets that prey on users, it makes drug use/abuse a taboo and then attempts to brush it under the rug like some hysterical religious paranoia of the medieval era. This is no good and this hurts people.

So drug harm reduction seeks to be the school counsellor who always let you bunk off a few classes here and there when you werent feeling great, not the tyrant who wants to throw you into the boiler room and give you written punishment. The school counsellor can empathize with your drug use and would rather you take drugs safely and so refers you to beneficial resources. This enables you to navigate the murky terrain of drug use much more safely than the tyrant who doesnt believe you are worth even knowing simple truths about drugs because, hey, you are to be punished for being a corrupted sinner! In this world drugs are a closely guarded secret for only those who wish to keep the truth out of the hands of everyday people. Sounds a lot like a tyrant when I put it like that!

The school counsellor however doesnt want you to take drugs. His end goal is just like the tyrant only the counsellor accepts human nature and the freedoms we have bestowed upon us universally. He knows you will probably go out and take drugs anyway but having been pushed away from a safety net, he also knows you might hurt yourself. He humanizes drug use. He humanizes addiction.

When the cows come home though, its all the same. Drug harm reduction simply seeks to find a resolution to drug use/abuse that doesnt involve punishing the person taking them and attempting to dehumanize them and their personal story behind his/her usage. It doesnt seek to ignore the most important aspects. But at no point is there active and/or intentional promotion of drugs and like stated, the premise of harm reduction is to ideally have nobody taking drugs at all, but to do it in a way where people make their own minds up knowing they have all the right information and most importantly, better support networks setup in society to facilitate their decisions.

Of course many people will use drug harm reduction resources to further their usage. This is inevitable. But in this being the case, drug use gets safer, people are more educated and informed and it also opens the door for rational debate and insight into the reality of drug use/abuse in society therefore shattering the facade that is placed over drug use in society solely to benefit political gain and biased and corrupt private interests/relationships involved with policy decisonmaking. It also aligns with the reality that drugs are here to stay in society and we have sought them since time immemorial and that they are part of our lives, only now we can restore that truth in a more realistic and scientifically based way.

The end goal though? Dont take drugs.

 

[pupnik]

you mean

that's not harm reduction.

I think harm reduction is when you help a kid who wants to pick up a shiny knife from the blade first, and you help them see that the handle is better, and when they get a handle on it, it is safer.

with drugs, the handle is often something related to attitude. so it's complex

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

I bet LSD cures people from thinking they have long-covid symptoms

probably shuts ppl up too from complaining about chronic pain

how do you spell harm reduction?

 

[finitelifeform]

@pupnik drugs are neither good or bad.
But thats the issue we face in society because of the decades long war fought on consciousness and what states are considered acceptable and which are not. Political wars have a very strong tendency to make people see black and white and to then seek out the "bad" tribe which then corrupts their ability to see and act clearly. We see that today very clearly. The war on drugs was and still is no different. It just wasnt weaponized to the degree much more recent political wars have been.

In an ideal world nobody takes drugs, especially not ones that alter consciousness profoundly like extremely powerful addicting and potentially damaging ones. Its a bitter pill to swallow because drugs are a part of our existence and we struggle to accept reality. Our idea of taking drugs is completely different to most cultures where drugs are considered medicines. We abuse drugs and we abuse ourselves. That isnt a good thing. Abuse in any context is not good. Drugs however? Completely different thing. Taking ayahuasca once a year is no big deal but taking the active ingredient DMT everyday without the proper framework? Not good. Does our culture even have that framework in place to support people? No. Thats why we go to other countries that do but we dont go with the intention of taking psychedelics everyday staring at four walls in a bedroom, which unfortunately many do, or at a wild party that all of a sudden becomes a little too overwhelming. Cannabis was once a medicine and now it one of the most highly abused drugs. Fortunately its side effects are not too severe compared to harder drugs yet still, abuse is abuse. Abuse is not a good thing.

So you need to understand what drug use actually means and within the context of our social, cultural and economical boundaries. When you look at this from outside the box you see a very real issue and one that doesnt get resolved just by pointing a finger at the prohibitionists and their supporters. Our version of taking drugs is unseen and unheard of throughout our history. Our version is massively out of control. And our version of taking drugs has resulted in one of the biggest problems that plagues the world we live in, and that is a sad truth whether you like to accept it or not. It has created a dangerous black market and permeated cultures that attempt to justify irresponsibility, abuse and harms on all levels - just so we can feel normal and go about our daily lives, and in some sad cases, not going about our daily lives at all because abuse destroys those lives.

Of course a grand vision of no drugs is impossible and silly to even consider ever becoming a reality. It wont ever happen. The war on drugs proved that. It simply made drugs more available and made society seek those drugs out even more. That being said, drugs will never be unregulated and there will never be a government that simply opens the gates and makes drug use/abuse a cultural and social norm, not within the context of a functioning society anyway. Again, emphasis on what drugs in society actually entails without being blown over by our own biases towards what we consider normal drug use based on our own cultural conditoning. In countries where drug policy has taken radical steps to humanize its use and decriminalize, you still have regulation, law and social norms. You will still get arrested smoking drugs in the street. You are not deliberately pushed down a road to take a certain drug. You are not encouraged. In fact, its the opposite but as stated in my post, it is done so in the most beneficial and conducive way possible for everyone in society.

The bottom line then is drug use/abuse is what is being reduced as much as possible but while doing it in a way that encourages people to make their own choices and take responsibility for themselves with the necessary support. Its under these conditions, you find less harms related to drugs and also a reduction in drug use too. Most people take drugs because of the dinstinct lack of framework offered by government and awareness of drugs themselves. They are illegal and so this gets redacted. But because the pressure is so high for them not to take them in society, they feel compelled to do so. Punishing people doesnt work. Punishing people makes them take their usage further underground which much of the time causes more harms in society. When people arent running from the law and the law accomodates them fairly, they tend to not feel the need to encourage behaviour that destroys the balance. This has been proven through decades of psychology research. When people feel rewarded and have something to appreciate, they need to preserve that something a whole lot more. Self destructive tendencies can be seen as an imbalance in both self and environment, and relations between the two. Nobody really wants to self destruct when their environment facilitates their development and value as an individual.

Ergo less drug consumption. Which fufills the goal behind all this... getting as many people to be open and honest about their drug use and for it to become behaviour that is normalized and for communities to take responsibility for living healthy beneficial lives and educating their people to make better informed decisions. At the bottom of all this is healthy awareness and participation in drug consumption which when under these conditions facilitates less harms to self, society, economy, and linked to this, less consumption.

Its not some conspiracy to take everything away. You are not a bad person if you recognize our global drug problem is a bad one and want to reduce it. Behind all that it is obvious reduction is predicated on the vision that ideally nobody should need to take drugs anyway unless within the context of a responsible framework. When you have these frameworks a byproduct of them naturally will be less drug use. The final goal of no drug consumption may never become a reality but under this umbrella, its hard not to support and encourage and see as a good thing.

We will always need responsibility. Moreover, shared responsibility. Assuming we can just let society crumble under uncontrolled/unregulated drug use and the consequences be positive is absurd. If drug policy reflects handing back responsibility to individuals and their communities it becomes a shared responsibility to deal with drugs together and for the benefit of the community longterm. Again, a positive side effect of that would naturally be less drug consumption with perhaps the goal of drugs having minimal presence at all in said communities, unless sanctioned and for specific purposes or with specific caveats.

 

[Xorkoth]

I disagree that the end goal of harm reduction is simply abstinence. It's unrealistic, and it doesn't work to "just say no", we have had this proven to us over the past decades. Harm reduction is about doing whatever possible to reduce harm to people through education. People are going to use drugs, but they can take actions to use them more safely, and that is harm reduction. For example, someone posts that they're thinking of trying heroin. I will post a long, detailed and passionate attempt to get them to reconsider, tell them that there is a strong chance they will regret ever going there more than they've ever regretted anything. I'll tell them about all the friends I've lost to heroin. Occasionally it actually causes someone to reconsider, and that is the best outcome. But usually people need to learn for themselves. And so then the goal becomes to try to get them to use it safely. Inform them of the dangers. Dissuade them from IV use. If they choose to go IV anyway, then we need to help them understand how to avoid abscesses and diseases and overdoses. Every step of the way there are opportunities for harm reduction.

It would be fantastic if people just didn't use destructive drugs. But we've opened pandora's box. Do you really believe we can achieve that? I don't. But I do think we can foster a healthier relationship with drugs in society. And if we cure the ills that are causing people to resort to opiates and other addictive drugs to cope with their painful lives, we could have a huge impact in reducing problematic drug use patterns. The problem is systemic and the underlying cause is not the drugs themselves, but a combination of society's relationship with drugs, and an eroding quality of life and total disconnect from what is important in life.

 

[finitelifeform]

I disagree that the end goal of harm reduction is simply abstinence. It's unrealistic, and it doesn't work to "just say no", we have had this proven to us over the past decades. Harm reduction is about doing whatever possible to reduce harm to people through education. People are going to use drugs, but they can take actions to use them more safely, and that is harm reduction. For example, someone posts that they're thinking of trying heroin. I will post a long, detailed and passionate attempt to get them to reconsider, tell them that there is a strong chance they will regret ever going there more than they've ever regretted anything. I'll tell them about all the friends I've lost to heroin. Occasionally it actually causes someone to reconsider, and that is the best outcome. But usually people need to learn for themselves. And so then the goal becomes to try to get them to use it safely. Inform them of the dangers. Dissuade them from IV use. If they choose to go IV anyway, then we need to help them understand how to avoid abscesses and diseases and overdoses. Every step of the way there are opportunities for harm reduction.

It would be fantastic if people just didn't use destructive drugs. But we've opened pandora's box. Do you really believe we can achieve that? I don't. But I do think we can foster a healthier relationship with drugs in society. And if we cure the ills that are causing people to resort to opiates and other addictive drugs to cope with their painful lives, we could have a huge impact in reducing problematic drug use patterns. The problem is systemic and the underlying cause is not the drugs themselves, but a combination of society's relationship with drugs, and an eroding quality of life and total disconnect from what is important in life.

Are you not seeking abstinence in those who want to try heroin? You arent saying only start small. You are essentially saying dont start using heroin because you have seen what it can do. That IS abstinence. The last option is decent advice but it isnt based on promotion. If we could educate people on the consequences of heroin use, the end goal would be to not get them to use it, or get them off it. That is abstinence, isnt it?

There is a cognitive dissonance with drugs and drug policies. And like I mentioned above, it is conditioned into us from an early age and seeks to make us militant towards rationally and openly discussing unless the conversation is tarnished by ulterior motives. We cannot see beyond our blind spots created over decades of being exposed to the failed policies that have affected us and those around us.

What we want, or at least what you stated in your example right here, is drug policy around abstinence. It just isnt done in the black and white extreme and excessively unrealistic way we consider "normal" policy to be done. But we cant accept it when being open about it when what we want is for most people not to take drugs. Most hard drugs people with experience would never recommend people take them who already havent. That is abstinence to me. That isnt reduced consumption. That is not taking it all.

Its the same for most other drugs, I just dont think we can accept it because we get stuck in or all or nothing thinking and anticipate if we acknowledge abstinence as a possibility it means drug policy and our lives will be affected negatively as a result. We suffer basically if we speak the truth and accept drugs are a problem and our society dealing with them is a problem. We also are in denial about rhe usage of drugs in society and what it entails and where the boundaries are, something past cultures and current ones with drugs do not have issues with. We dont want boundaries essentially but we also dont want drugs flooding our streets and affecting our kids.

That is the wrong drug policy and the propaganda behind the war on drugs that makes people think that and that is deliberate. The idea was to disenchant and dissolve communities who socially took drugs and aimed to dissolve the cultures associated with them. This spread out into wider society like any other fear driven hysteria propped up by a failed corrupt political agenda. It doesnt mean that away from this policy, and if it was abolished, the same issues would exist if policy was changed. The whole point of changing drug policy towards evidence based drug policy is to fundamentally alter perceptions around drugs and normalize their usage again. The conditioning people have been subject to has prevented them from seeing beyond this conditioning and so they only think of preserving the current reality because they fear losing it altogether, or for things to get worse, no trust in the system etc.

Our current reality is toxic. Our way of looking at drugs is wrong. But we are so intoxicated ourselves (metaphorically speaking) that we cannot see beyond the cloud that is our current global drug problem. We want to remain in that cloud because its better than change. We dont like change because that entails we have to adapt to that change and like all creatures of comfort, adapting to change when we can stay the same is way easier, even if it doesnt benefit us.

None of this implies we are doing injustice to people or their sovereign right to use drugs. It means we have a higher degree of awareness and responsibility that overarches the issues with drugs and creates a framework whereby no harm is better than any chance of harm at all. That is abstinence. If you dont want to run the risk of becoming an alcoholic, you dont drink. If you dont want to potentially destroy yourself with a meth habit, you dont take meth. The conscious and self respecting society would support abstinence, even if that wasnt a possibility. It doesnt imply they are tyrants however attempting to control the freedom of others. It implies they care enough to make the environment beneficial to the person and encouraging that their first impression is to not take drugs at all. And this is a good thing. Denying that simply speaks volumes to the problems we have in society. It is denial, simply put. How can that be changed without going over the top and attempting to root out drug use altogether, is the question.

What do you think?

 

[pupnik]

@finitelifeform
I disagree that, in a perfect world people would not take drugs.
also
I do not yearn for any perfect world concept. cannot get behind it at all! people are not perfect, and no concept of perfect is perfect.
In fact I think that we really have to do our best to oppose people who want to regulate others.
I like some drugs, because I enjoy their effects at the doses and frequency that I use them, and it's great that I can get away with it, without any fear.

When I was younger it was illegal to possess - now nobody gives a damn, and that is a huge improvement.

Reality is not toxic, some people's behavior is, some ideas are. Some parts of nature are toxic, and a lot of manufacturing byproducts are toxic, because of peoples bad ideas, bad concepts, watch out for it. you could easily be infected.

If you do become infected with toxic ideas, you might need to take lsd therapy.

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

it's normal to want to go out of your mind and alter reality - so just don't over-do-it....way easier said than done lol but that's harm reduction in my mind

 

[Deleted member 521610]

Old timers told me LSD is best done once a year but they take 10 tabs when they do to get the full blown life affirming trip