• Bluelight HOT THREADS
  • Let's Welcome Our NEW MEMBERS!

Crack Cocaine & Conspiracy documentary (Netflix (

thegreenhand

Moderator: DiTM
Staff member
Joined
Aug 16, 2019
Messages
1,538
Location
{\mathbb C}^{n}
agreed that dr carl hart can sometimes make dubious claims. i.e that "meth and adderall are the same drug" (his youtube channel has a video titled this). yes i am well aware that they're damn close but they are not the same drug. most people have no clue how close they really are but it's wrong to say they are the same. using the words "nearly indistinguishable" or "extremely similar" i would take no problems with since both are honest statements - but same is not true

that said, dr hart is one of my personal heroes. he has inspired me in the process of overcoming the shame and guilt i once felt (and still sometimes do) for using drugs. not saying my use is 100% healthy all the time, but the shame gets you nowhere. i feel more comfortable talking openly about my drug experiences among non drug users due to his courage in coming out of the drug closet. he'll forever have my respect for that
 

SnafuInTheVoid

Moderator: NMI, NSADD
Staff member
Joined
May 27, 2020
Messages
6,028
Location
in the cockpit
agreed that dr carl hart can sometimes make dubious claims. i.e that "meth and adderall are the same drug" (his youtube channel has a video titled this). yes i am well aware that they're damn close but they are not the same drug. most people have no clue how close they really are but it's wrong to say they are the same. using the words "nearly indistinguishable" or "extremely similar" i would take no problems with since both are honest statements - but same is not true
I agree, and of what I complain is often his choice of words ultimately, and not what he is saying

for exampled if he said "People experience acute alcohol withdrawal during a hangover" instead of "a hangover is caused by acute alcohol withdrawal" I would have applauded him, but instead, I had to criticism him because I didn't understand what he is trying to say


that said, dr hart is one of my personal heroes. he has inspired me in the process of overcoming the shame and guilt i once felt (and still sometimes do) for using drugs.
May I ask why?

I'll be honest, I never heard of Dr. Hart until I saw him on Joe Rogan's podcast several months ago. Ever since then my entire opinion of him has been formed around him on that podcast. I really don't know anything about him.

I just want to know what he said/did that inspired you?

I am unfamiliar with his work, sadly. I don't mean to bash the guy.

I was really judging simply based off that one statement about alcohol hangovers on Roegan's podcast (was the first thing I heard from him).
 

thegreenhand

Moderator: DiTM
Staff member
Joined
Aug 16, 2019
Messages
1,538
Location
{\mathbb C}^{n}
I’d recommend you check out some of his scientific work as well as his opinion pieces.

he has very eloquent criticisms of the drug war that have helped me to speak about these things in a more intelligent manner

It’s not really any one thing in particular that he said that inspired me. He was just one of the first people I came across who had real thoughtful insights into drugs (I learned of him about 3-4 yrs ago). And because of that I just read a lot of his work and the goals of it all just made sense. The message really resonated with me.

and now he has gone and publicly spoken of his own drug use. and not just of marijuana or psychedelics mind you, but of every kind of drug imaginable including the currently most stigmatized ones in our society. in my mind, that cements his character as one of integrity and unabashed honesty

something that does worry me about his most recent public outreach is that he describes his drug use “like a scientist”. I.e. explaining how he intentionally put himself into opioid withdrawal simply to experiment with it or how he has titrated his heroin use to a max of 10 days in a row after finding his sweet spot. and more generally he uses drugs like many of us here do: as a curiosity and a space to explore. But most drug users don’t think of drug use like that. And I think a lot of the general public will fail to hear his message because of that
 

SnafuInTheVoid

Moderator: NMI, NSADD
Staff member
Joined
May 27, 2020
Messages
6,028
Location
in the cockpit
I’d recommend you check out some of his scientific work as well as his opinion pieces.

he has very eloquent criticisms of the drug war that have helped me to speak about these things in a more intelligent manner

It’s not really any one thing in particular that he said that inspired me. He was just one of the first people I came across who had real thoughtful insights into drugs (I learned of him about 3-4 yrs ago). And because of that I just read a lot of his work and the goals of it all just made sense. The message really resonated with me.

and now he has gone and publicly spoken of his own drug use. and not just of marijuana or psychedelics mind you, but of every kind of drug imaginable including the currently most stigmatized ones in our society. in my mind, that cements his character as one of integrity and unabashed honesty

something that does worry me about his most recent public outreach is that he describes his drug use “like a scientist”. I.e. explaining how he intentionally put himself into opioid withdrawal simply to experiment with it or how he has titrated his heroin use to a max of 10 days in a row after finding his sweet spot. and more generally he uses drugs like many of us here do: as a curiosity and a space to explore. But most drug users don’t think of drug use like that. And I think a lot of the general public will fail to hear his message because of that

he is certainly taking on a very "gonzo" type approach to drug science and quite literally immersing himself in it. I really applaud him for that, I do, I just really took offense to the way the talked about his heroin and meth use on Joe Rogan podcast - he spoke of it like he used it like it was coffee - zero problem. No comedown. No withdrawal.

Great. I partially agree with that, but he didn't say anything about CRAVING IT, how he felt when he STOPPED, how he felt during withdrawal. It's like he's trying to sell heroin as something that it CAN be, but for 99% of people is not.

In general as your average listener listening to him I got the impression that "heroin I get from timmy down the street is just fine, if I use it responsibly I will feel great and never get addicted" - I am exaggerating here but trying to show you how I felt after listening to him on Joe Rogan, again, not knowing anything about him or his work

I remember being confused because some of what he said I loved and agreed with
 

thegreenhand

Moderator: DiTM
Staff member
Joined
Aug 16, 2019
Messages
1,538
Location
{\mathbb C}^{n}
Yes that is my biggest critique of his outreach as well. It seems like he oversimplifies things and ends up saying some less than true things. Rather than explain why meth and adderall are so similar, he’d rather just skip some of the details even if that’s where the real insight occurs

realizing that this adderall going up my nose is the grandfather seed of every other wonderful amphetamine might just make you take a step back and think about the drugs your putting in your body, rather than just assign a drug name to a high you want amd say fuck it.

its like he doesn’t think a lay audience can understand the details of these things and because of that he just handwaves away some very critical parts of the argument
 

SnafuInTheVoid

Moderator: NMI, NSADD
Staff member
Joined
May 27, 2020
Messages
6,028
Location
in the cockpit
It seems like he oversimplifies things and ends up saying some less than true things.
Yes I would agree with this.

or almost as if he assumes everyone else is a disciplined doctor studying drugs objectively like him?

he seems to be speaking his message to someone other than a general audience - any ration person that will listen, maybe? (at least on these podcasts)

now that I think about it - why would I think someone could speak so... informally about drugs? i don't know, maybe I just don't understand the man

I certainly support anything he does and agree with his message
 

thegreenhand

Moderator: DiTM
Staff member
Joined
Aug 16, 2019
Messages
1,538
Location
{\mathbb C}^{n}
or almost as if he assumes everyone else is a disciplined doctor studying drugs objectively like him?
I don’t think this is it. if he’s dumbing down his argument for us, surely then he recognizes that a lay audience does not have his skillset


he seems to be speaking his message so someone other than a general audience - any ration person that will listen, maybe?
I suppose. Who then to get this across to everyone else?
 

thegreenhand

Moderator: DiTM
Staff member
Joined
Aug 16, 2019
Messages
1,538
Location
{\mathbb C}^{n}
Lol I assume you meant rational?

I think that’s where we come in, word of mouth plain and simple. people learn infinitely more from a conversation than from news segment
 

thegreenhand

Moderator: DiTM
Staff member
Joined
Aug 16, 2019
Messages
1,538
Location
{\mathbb C}^{n}
I have a habit of telling people heroin and meth are horrible drugs. I think that's my point maybe.

Maybe I'm the one who need to learn?
Lol alcohol is a horrible drug but I still recommend a good Pinot noir!

I understand that your experience with them is horrible, but that’s not universal and I think that’s what we need to be more honest about
 

SnafuInTheVoid

Moderator: NMI, NSADD
Staff member
Joined
May 27, 2020
Messages
6,028
Location
in the cockpit
I understand that your experience with them is horrible, but that’s not universal and I think that’s what we need to be more honest about
Not horrible. I've had amazing experiences. This is just a very touchy subject, would you agree?

and let's be honest heroin is not a drug you would pass out at a party and expect everyone to have a good time - yet this is not my issue


And man I feel horrible for even criticizing the dude, felt like friendly fire, I just have a VERY strong gut reaction to protect anyone from heroin or meth or the damage drugs did to me - that's where I'm coming from

I also think meth is an amazing drug with amazing potential neuroprotective properties

I'm on nobodies side here, just a potentially concerned commentator

and thats 100% what my message and viewpoint is here

an uninformed opinionated commentator
 

thegreenhand

Moderator: DiTM
Staff member
Joined
Aug 16, 2019
Messages
1,538
Location
{\mathbb C}^{n}
Would agree 100% lol

your concern is valid and I think mirrors mine. we both see that he says some untruthful things at times.

i guess I try to speak about drugs irl on an objective level, but of course I’m not always successful. We all have our biases. Honestly just getting people to read Wikipedia or Reddit for a drug is a massive success
 

the_void

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 22, 2011
Messages
412
agreed that dr carl hart can sometimes make dubious claims. i.e that "meth and adderall are the same drug" (his youtube channel has a video titled this). yes i am well aware that they're damn close but they are not the same drug. most people have no clue how close they really are but it's wrong to say they are the same. using the words "nearly indistinguishable" or "extremely similar" i would take no problems with since both are honest statements - but same is not true

that said, dr hart is one of my personal heroes. he has inspired me in the process of overcoming the shame and guilt i once felt (and still sometimes do) for using drugs. not saying my use is 100% healthy all the time, but the shame gets you nowhere. i feel more comfortable talking openly about my drug experiences among non drug users due to his courage in coming out of the drug closet. he'll forever have my respect for that

Re: “meth” vs adderall as very similar - I’m pretty certain dr Hart knows that’s wrong . I’ve seen the actual research papers somewhere he actually used d-amp for the comparison - NOT the partially racemic adderall (appropriate , because street methamphetamine is d-meth, NOT racemic) .

Dexedrine and d-meth are indeed pretty similar , but few under 45 years have heard of Dexedrine. Differences between d-amp and d-meth - they’re very similar , but d-meth lasts longer, has a strong body high where d-amp doesn’t , d-meth is more euphoric (subjective) and initially more similar to mdma via stronger serotonin release

On this note, he also says methamphetamine DOESNT cause tooth loss. He says methamphetamine is rather correlated to negligence of hygiene , thus the tooth loss. Simplification - I’m no dentist but meth BOTH directly causes tooth loss through dry mouth and teeth grinding (xerostomia , bruxism ) and is ALSO strongly CORRELATED with negligence of hygiene

Like I said I adore dr Carl Hart BUT I tend to think critically about everything that is said about drugs, I don’t care if it comes from drs Mate, Hart, Siegel, or Nutt , I’m gonna do my own fact checking . These doctors give me novel ways of thinking outside the box about drugs, NOT “oh no , they said XYZ about hardcore drugs so it must be so”.
 
Last edited:

the_void

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 22, 2011
Messages
412
See, what I originally had a problem with was when Dr. Hart said on the podcast to MILLIONS of people, as a Doctor none the less, that a hangover from alcohol is actually the result of an immediate physical dependence to alcohol. No, it's fucking not, it's the build of of acetaldehyde. LITERALLY EVERYONE KNOWS THAT.

He's said some EXTREMELY dubious things about drugs.

That was my initial issue with him.

But after Hamilton kinda backed him up I realized that I was only partially wrong, because the guy really is a pioneer for drug reform which I have to respect. I think overall he is just too ahead of his time maybe (and says very questionable shit sometimes).

It certainly is brave to be a doctor of medicine or science and admit to the world you enjoy using heroin and meth. Sounds like a horrible career move, but it kinda made is career I guess?

I saw this interview joe Rogan& Hamilton Morris re: dr Hart’s dubious explanation of alcohol hangover as withdrawal and thought of your discussion


56:00

Rogan : “dr hart was trying to explain to me What the (alcohol hangover ) is and essentially he (hart) was saying When you’re getting a hangover It’s your body reacting To the addictive properties of alcohol “

Morris : “I am not familiar with any evidence of that ... I’d have to look at his source for that ... there’s an alternate explanation that’s even simpler . Alcohol is metabolized into a chemical acetaldehyde that’s toxic ... you’re consuming enormous quantities of the drug .Alcohol is a very weak drug by weight. So all this acetaldehyde accumulates in your body and it has a toxic effect “

So there you go. Anyway brilliant interview , Morris totally had me until I paraphrase, he basically said heroin (and the opiates) aren’t that interesting as drugs , culture just tells us they are, cannabis is a much more interesting drug.” Totally subjective

I don’t understand people’s fascination with cannabis, I find it non-recreational BUT pretty valuable medicinally . I find opium (along with the opioid drugs) the most interesting drugs in existence
 
Last edited:

the_void

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 22, 2011
Messages
412
I agree, and of what I complain is often his choice of words ultimately, and not what he is saying

for exampled if he said "People experience acute alcohol withdrawal during a hangover" instead of "a hangover is caused by acute alcohol withdrawal" I would have applauded him, but instead, I had to criticism him because I didn't understand what he is trying to say



May I ask why?

I'll be honest, I never heard of Dr. Hart until I saw him on Joe Rogan's podcast several months ago. Ever since then my entire opinion of him has been formed around him on that podcast. I really don't know anything about him.

I just want to know what he said/did that inspired you?

I am unfamiliar with his work, sadly. I don't mean to bash the guy.

I was really judging simply based off that one statement about alcohol hangovers on Roegan's podcast (was the first thing I heard from him).

Careful what you clicked the like button on , You might have liked my post before I edited it, I added my SUBJECTIVE OPINION that contrary to what Hamilton is saying , opioids are very interesting, conversely cannabis not so much - a lot of ppl swear by cannabis and I don’t want to step on any toes
 
Last edited:

SnafuInTheVoid

Moderator: NMI, NSADD
Staff member
Joined
May 27, 2020
Messages
6,028
Location
in the cockpit
So there you go. Anyway brilliant interview , Norris totally had me until I paraphrase, he basically said heroin (and the opiates) aren’t that interesting as drugs , culture just tells us they are, cannabis is a much more interesting drug.” Totally subjective

I don’t understand people’s fascination with cannabis, I find it non-recreational BUT pretty valuable medicinally . I find opium (along with the opioid drugs) the most interesting drugs in existence

Well. Hamilton is a weird dude and his DOC is salvia... I also kind of agree with him that opioids are generally "boring" drugs, although I don't know if I would use the word boring. Maybe "uninspired".

I also think cannabis is highly overrated.
 

4meSM

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 6, 2014
Messages
2,470
Location
Wasp spray
I'm glad to see that many of you share my conflicted views on Carl Haart.
It seems like most people either love him for speaking the "truth" about drugs, or dislike him for not saying that drugs are bad and that nobody should ever try them.
He has actually said plenty of wrong things and spread what could be considered to be pro-drug missinformation (except for weed and alcohol, he doesn't seem to like those drugs).

It's very frustrating because IMO it doesn't solve the problem at all, people just keep consuming more and more inacurate information, just from the other side of the argument... And he is speaking from a position of authority (as an expert on the subject) !

His statement about studying drugs to eradicate the "crack problem" and save the black communities kind of makes me think that he is pretty prone to bias.
It makes me feel like he went from being 100% anti-drugs to 100% pro-drugs when he realized they "lied to him".
And just to be clear, I agree with him when it comes to drug policy and I fully respect him for speaking up against injustice.

I still haven't read his book but the part about cocaethylene is very very misleading (I know because we discussed it on another thread a couple of months ago). The paper he referred to is much less rigorous than one would think, it honestly surprised me coming from someone who is supposed to be an expert on the subject. And I'm not implying he isn't an expert, I'm just saying what I felt.

I much prefer Hamilton Morris tbh, from what I've seen he is much more precise in his speech. You can easily tell when he's just sharing his opinion and when he's actually talking about "technical stuff".
 

the_void

Bluelighter
Joined
Mar 22, 2011
Messages
412
I'm glad to see that many of you share my conflicted views on Carl Haart.
It seems like most people either love him for speaking the "truth" about drugs, or dislike him for not saying that drugs are bad and that nobody should ever try them.
He has actually said plenty of wrong things and spread what could be considered to be pro-drug missinformation (except for weed and alcohol, he doesn't seem to like those drugs).

It's very frustrating because IMO it doesn't solve the problem at all, people just keep consuming more and more inacurate information, just from the other side of the argument... And he is speaking from a position of authority (as an expert on the subject) !

His statement about studying drugs to eradicate the "crack problem" and save the black communities kind of makes me think that he is pretty prone to bias.
It makes me feel like he went from being 100% anti-drugs to 100% pro-drugs when he realized they "lied to him".
And just to be clear, I agree with him when it comes to drug policy and I fully respect him for speaking up against injustice.

I still haven't read his book but the part about cocaethylene is very very misleading (I know because we discussed it on another thread a couple of months ago). The paper he referred to is much less rigorous than one would think, it honestly surprised me coming from someone who is supposed to be an expert on the subject. And I'm not implying he isn't an expert, I'm just saying what I felt.

I much prefer Hamilton Morris tbh, from what I've seen he is much more precise in his speech. You can easily tell when he's just sharing his opinion and when he's actually talking about "technical stuff".

Dr Carl Hart - i adore dr Hart , but I think his stuff is most interesting and appropriate if you have high drug literacy and have the ability to question him when he says something questionable (e.g his theory of alcohol hangovers , meth itself doesn’t cause teeth problems - it’s only correlated , opioids directly have anti psychotic effects )

He is definitely prone to bias . This is personal in more ways then one , his upbringing in the black community during the 80s, black relatives in the criminal justice system, his career. He has reason to be passionate , but in that he loses objectivity (which is why doctors can’t treat family members ). At the same time , I’d argue his passion is what makes him so compelling

True, He doesn’t seem to like alcohol much . In his books he says he smokes some weed , but it had to grow on him (he says it wasn’t until he was taught how to enjoy its effects that he liked it), it wasn’t a natural fit , he even talks about a paranoid episode in his first book “High Price “. That being said , he defends cannabis and says it doesn’t cause psychosis - (I don’t know enough to say if it does or doesn’t )

In prevalent drug reform , we see different approaches . Dr Mate stresses trauma as a cause of opioid abuse . Dr Hart goes personal , and talks about remembering correlation not causation, Hamilton talks importance of psychedelics etc. I like them all , they’re different unique angles of the same problem.

Its no competition, but since you stated your preference but I prefer dr Hart to h. Morris . I find Morris great as an interviewee, like in the above interview with Rogan was absolutely mesmerizing stuff .

His show I don’t like that much because of where my interests lie - I’m not much interested in psychedelics . Bravo for doing an episode on methaqualone in South Africa (that’s something I only heard whispers about) , but his “Positive Methamphetamine “ episode left me wondering what was positive about that ? He could have talked about Desoxyn (medical meth) , or the fact that the vicks inhaler is l-methamphetamine, or the fact that methamphetamine is a fabulous - while extremely powerful tool that is often used irresponsibly and that’s MAINLY why people run into so many problems with it - there was none of that .
 
Last edited:

Burnt Offerings

Bluelighter
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
5,262
Location
USA
The OG of this particular topic:


He got smeared while he was alive but since then we know that the CIA interfered with DEA operations in Central America and gave substantial logistical and material assistance to known drug traffickers.
 
Top