Would you consider dissociatives to be 'hard drugs'?

[Albion]

@ Jesusgreen, have you read about Big Lurch, the hip hop artist? Basically he took too much PCP and did some pretty awful things not realizing he was doing anything wrong at the time. Its an interesting story if you haven't read it. Should come up with a quick search. These kinds of stories have scared me from trying PCP since I was a kid. That's why I've always thought of it as a hard drug. I'm a big fan of ketamine too, just scared to try PCP.

Have a look at Steve-O's 'PCP Saved My Life' journal for unequivocal proof on the matter.

 

[Limitbreaker]

This makes opiates not a hard drug IMO, which is wrong according to most peoples interpretations.

No. You need to count in everything.

Addiction to opiates DOES fuck in your head.

 

[Jakeperson]

TI don't find it much of a headfuck.

I added that last part because I know people are going to disagree with me, that doesn't make my own interpretation/opinion wrong, just wrong for every one else.

 

[jazz hands]

The headfuck from opiates comes with time. Lack of motivation, drive, etc will occur with enough usage.

/derail

 

[Doug2113]

yes...lmfao...this should go unsaid...

 

[Phoenix_rising]

I don`t understand those who rate Ketamine over Methoxetamine,i have used Ketamine extensively in the past and have found in my experience that Methoxetamine is superior...I mean a Ketamine chemist actually created it so he`s not going to make something that is inadequate,IMO he has given birth to something quite exceptional.

 

[King Sasquatch]

Dissociatives are definitely hard drugs. From my experiences, I found ketamine to be far more addictive than heroin, the quintessential "hard drug". It is so easy to fall into a pattern of heavy use of any dissociative, everyone I know who does them regularly becomes completely obsessed with them and the drug slowly consumes their lives. If this is not a description of hard drugs, I don't know what is. Not to say that moderate use of dissociatives is bad, I love K and DXM, but proceed with caution, these drugs can be very bad news if used irresponsibly.

 

[Limpet_Chicken]

I am another of those people firmly of the opinion that the arbitrary distinction of hard vs soft drugs is pointless. Furthermore, I think it misleading and potentially in some cases dangerous, in certain ways. Mainly that people might be persuaded that a so-called soft drug that actually presents a significant amount of danger to a user either inherently or if not used very carefully and responsibly, for instance mephedrone and other beta-keto derivatives of PMA, people seem to class it as a 'soft drug', I have known someone to just brush it off and say 'I'll be fine, don't worry' after telling me she had done it and liked it, would do it again, and I told her of its potent vasoconstrictive effects and almost certain significant potential for cardiotoxicity, linking some BL threads and citing some journals.

And on the other side of the coin, whilst not dangerous, I don't like that misinformation and/or propaganda might put people off having a good time or in the case of psychedelics, growing psychologically, confronting issues and having the opportunity to see things from new perspectives sometimes.


As far as dissociatives go the one I am most familiar with is MXE, never had the chance to try phencyclidine, other than that, I have tried both ket, not much experience with it though, just a couple of times, and DXM which did absolutely nothing other than blur my vision and make me nauseated and vomit repeatedly. Delightful experiences, I don't think, which stayed the same regardless of weather cough syrup, cough candies or lab grade DXM HBr were used, didn't notice any negative effects that lasted from either drug, but I never had the chance to use ketamine regularly. Did get some benefit from my K use though, that I really can't explain.

Somehow, I became able to touch-type the first time I tried it, they tried teaching it with computer software in my first special school when I was younger, but I never really bothered much with it, and never was much good at it either, never bothered outside of a few hours in class here and there, years later, first time I tried any ket (dose unknown, I was given some K pills by a guy who wanted me to have a chance to try it after finding out I had been looking but not managed to get hold of any, going from my use of MXE I would say on the fairly light side of the dose range, properly active but not close to being incapacitated), I got on the computer and found I could touch type without any effort and do it well. I have been able to ever since. Bloody odd, but there you go, dissociatives can be a strange experience.

Methoxetamine...used it pretty heavily, eventually become addicted to the stuff, started using it for opioid tolerance, as I am a chronic pain patient, and found it could actually substitute for opioids entirely with no withdrawal symptoms if I switched abruptly from my pain meds to MXE, and unlike opioids its brilliant at dealing with neuropathic pain, I'm scripted pregabalin for the nerve damage inflicted by a surgical attempt to repair my knee but its only semi-effective. Insufflated it to begin with, tried plugging it, before working up the stomach to inject (I have a real problem with needles, I can't stand the fucking things....or rather, I used to I still dislike them, especially IM but after doing countless IV shots I have no problem shooting up)

Ended up being on it most of the time, although now I have kicked the habit, used to buy in 10g lots and use until it was gone, then order more shortly before it would run out. Did have some moments with pretty dark and depressive thoughts when I overused, and it really buggered up my ability to do demanding manual work, such as welding and assembling technical bits and pieces, the things I was welding together often turned out substandard or complete shite and needed re-doing while not on MXE, thankfully only while actually under the influence. Likewise, on a heavy dose of MXE, communication becomes difficult, speech slurred etc, and making a pigs ear of speaking in sign.

On the other hand, I find it a very enjoyable drug when used more conservatively. Ended up flushing a fair few grams I had left of a 10g bag, and dumping a large number of syringes, needles, micron filters and all but a couple of amp crackers and taking a complete break from it. Decided I am not going to buy it so often, or in anywhere near that sort of quantity in future. Just recently though I did place an order for a couple of grams and enough rigs to use it. I needed the break, although flushing the amount of MXE I did wasn't something I am happy about doing, but at the time, I needed to break the chance to give in to temptation. Responsible use is important with NMDA antagonists, they can be very seductive if one fails to keep an eye on one's intake.

I recommend using a combination of a 'racetam and choline, particularly aniracetam or better yet, pramiracetam, although piracetam is also of use, when not using MXE, as they act to increase glutamatergic activity, and in the case of aniracetam, which has some degree of AMPAkine activity its likely also to induce BDNF release and increase the expression of BDNF mRNA, promoting neurogenesis and long-term plasticity, improving memory etc. As has been noted by some on BL, the racetams seem to counteract dissociatives, which isn't surprising given their mode of action, and I can confirm that is the case for MXE.

 

[Survived Abortion]

There is no such thing. "Hard drugs" is just a linguistic term along with a set of pre-programmed beliefs. It's just a story that people create around a completely neutral thing in order to explain their inadequate self-discipline. People like to lay blame to anything, so we blame molecules for being too hard on us. Completely stupid when you think about it.

How apparently "hard" or "soft" these things may appear depends entirely on the user's ability to 'handle' the increased potential that they exert on you. Has anyone ever read Ram Dass' story of how he gave 915ug (3 x 305ug pills) LSD to his Indian yogi guru Maharaj Ji? Nothing happened. Have a gander here:

http://www.miqel.com/entheogens/neem-karoli-baba-lsd-alpert.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkmOdbJnMGw&t=7m1s

 

[Synaps3]

Like the first guy said, it doesn't really matter. But if you were to ask a random shmoe on the street, they'd probably say that anything beyond weed is a "hard drug". I don't understand why people get caught up in these naming conventions. It doesn't matter.

 

[jazz hands]

Regardless of if you think hard/ soft is a useful distinction, I think everyone we agree that dissociatives aren't benign.

 

[Thorns Have Roses]

There is no such thing. "Hard drugs" is just a linguistic term along with a set of pre-programmed beliefs. It's just a story that people create around a completely neutral thing in order to explain their inadequate self-discipline. People like to lay blame to anything, so we blame molecules for being too hard on us. Completely stupid when you think about it.
\

Yeah, and I guess the "addicts are weak willed people" theory is so much better. And the Guru totally palmed the shit, fo sho.

Anyway, yeah I'd consider dissociatives to be hard drugs, for reasons I have explained a few times.

 

[Survived Abortion]

Yeah, and I guess the "addicts are weak willed people" theory is so much better.

You are you're own master.

And the Guru totally palmed the shit, fo sho.

Not at all. He explains this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Aei7T86cIto&t=14m3s

From the book Be Here Now:

"He took the four unbroken pills. Then, one by one, very obviously and very deliberately, he placed each one in his mouth and swallowed it-- another unspoken thought of mine now answered."​

(Quoted from http://www.miqel.com/entheogens/neem-karoli-baba-lsd-alpert.html)

 

[Thorns Have Roses]

You are you're own master.

The entire field of psychology has just been rendered invalid by your statement, publish a thesis on that shit. Or acknowledge that absolute free will does not exist, and genetic/environmental factors significantly influence actions and are beyond the conscious control of the individual agent. (I think I'm being necessarily confrontational in my tone, forgive me, I'm a bit too drunk too be tactful)

And the guru thing is still charlatanism I believe (you do realize people train to be able to look like they took something when they in fact didn't, right?). Spiritual training does not make you immune to massive doses of psychoactives. He wouldn't be able to be normal on 900-1500mcg any more than if he drank a handle

 

[D n A]

I'd say they're in between hard and soft. That's always been my opinion on it. Makes more sense.

 

[trogere]

Yes. Ketamine is the most addictive drug I ever tried.

Also, high-dose ketamine rides put the user in far away states of mind.

During my ketamine use period, and for a while after, I noticed changes in my personnality. Paranoia, egocentricity, ...

 

[Thorns Have Roses]

SA, if you'd allow, I'm slightly sober-er than before and would like to try to actually reply. To chalk things down to some quantifiable trait like willpower (assuming it exists) only works if we assume these drugs have an equal pull/appeal to all persons, and this is not the case at all. If you don't feel any particular desire to be dissociated, or on opiates, or tweaking all the time, you can't claim that your superior willpower has prevented you from becoming an addict, it's just different psycho-social conditions. Were you to have some stress or mental issues that you were unable to ameliorate without exogenous chemical help, your desire to abuse a given drug or class of drugs is going to be obscenely stronger than someone without such issues. And even with these issues, different things appeal to different people, of course.

I'd try to define hard/soft in this case, while baseless from a purely scientific standpoint, as useful to us as humans. Psychs, cannabis, e, etc. etc. don't cause a pull towards chronic use even whilst causing great damage (psychological or physiological) to the user. Even though cannabis can be quite psychologically addicted, it's generally something people can do while living an otherwise ordinary life (I don't think there are many people who would choose to get some herb over being kicked out on the streets for not paying rent, but I can name a number of folks using H or crystal who have let this happen).

Not all drugs present the same health risks, and those that a significant portion of the population find to cause serious issues...I don't see anything wrong with exceptionalizing them in a somewhat arbitrary/debatable category.

 

[azgaza]

I don't care much for the distinction between 'hard' and 'soft' drugs, since it is rather subjective. Also even if I take the more comon criteria I find it hard to judge dissociatives; the good sides of them being that it's fairly hard to overdose on them, moderate or light use does not do much if any harm at all, they can be very beneficial in many ways too, but dissociative addiction is well possible too and pretty harsh (although luckely not phyisical, running out just means thinking about it all the time, not much else then that). Either way I think the only real 'hard' side is the addictive quality and the physical problems that can occur when very heavy daily use has started (like how ketamine's metabolite is rather harsh on the bladder), but since you need serious abuse to get to that state, well it's hard to judge.

 

[Ecstuhcy]

i look at the more specific yin and yang of drugs is....'experiential drugs' and 'effect drugs'.
psychedelics being drugs which induce an 'experience', being unpredictable as to the specifics of effect as well as the amount of comfort and/or contentment which will come about through their use.

whereas 'effect' drugs imo, are drugs taken because of a desirable sensation which occurs from the intake of that drug. these drugs, you can tell 'whats gonna happen' from doing them, i class alcohol and pills as being the primary examples.

in this spectrum mdma and disassociatives are somewhere in the middle, depending on the use and function each individual is providing. weed too, i feel is somewhere in the middle, often taken as a 'typical stone' to many and disregarded in terms of experiential variation. but for myself, and many others i know, weeds can be unpredictable and provide trance experiences not unlike the traditional psychedelics.

i lost interest in 'effect drugs' ever since i experienced a couple psychedelic breakthroughs. and i do consider these effect drugs 'hard' drugs generally speaking.

but the other distinction i draw, and i'm a unique case, as i'm a tripper but i am also a raw-food vegan and very specific about what i allow in my body. this being said, the other yin and yang distinction between substances is toxic vs nontoxic. and i choose to abstain completely from alcohol because i don't like 'even a little' bit of neutoxicity, hippocampus degeneration, dendrite problems (whatever crazy shit it does up there). i also abstain from mdma and all pharmaceuticals and Also the disassociatives. i may be wrong, its been a bit since i've read about the physical effects of disassociatives, but i remember them being hard on the liver...not to the extent of liver failure from a few experiences, but things which have a 'heavy' 'low dose of something toxic' effect on the body are things which i choose to not do.

i meditate daily, and can feel the difference between a body at 100% and a body at 99%, and seeing as though i have infinite fun with the substances which i allow into my body, and definitely don't feel like i'm 'missing out' by not doing these others, i personally...choose 100% :D however, most people, who don't meditate daily and are not actively working to detoxify their bodies and refine their diets, may not care about the difference or be near any conscious awareness of these 'subtle differences'.

anyways, i lost intererest in 'effect drugs', and then have slowly added things to the list which 'are heavy in the body' or 'hard to process' which are to be avoided for myself as well. i have a very 'extreme' view on what i personally allow 'clean enough' to enter my body in both diet and drug use. but for me, 'hard' is anything which is used for personal bliss, or something which I KNOW is not good for my body.

i valued my dxm experiences quite a bit, and i grew mentally and spiritually through them. but, i don't want to tax my liver from its consumption. and honestly i don't know if i'd do it again anyways even if it was pure, i don't really ressonate with it anymore, but thats besides the point. also the whole 'olneys lesions' thing seemed kinda freaky. i know its disputed on this site, and i'm not saying that it does happen, but that is a 'potential' physically toxic side effect of disassociatives which would definitely land them on my 'hard' list if proven.

sorry to ramble, but yeah, i think its up to your own distinction...kind of a gray area. if i was gonna do something that i consider a 'hard drug' i would go for a disassociative over mdma or over pharms or alcohol for damn sure, but thats just me.

This guy knows what he's talking about, if you're harming your body just to get a "feel" you have to reconsider your actions.