• The database table for Search and "New Messages" functionality is currently being rebuilt. Until it is completed, you may see empty or incomplete results for these.
  • Bluelight HOT THREADS
  • Let's Welcome Our NEW MEMBERS!

News Positive drug stories - announcing a new research publication in collaboration with Bluelight.org

At Bluelight.org we encourage collaborative partnerships between academic researchers and our community. In 2016 we were approached by Liam Engel with a proposal to utilise data from Bluelight for his PhD, using an engaged and participatory approach. Liam is now Dr Engel (well done!) and we are thrilled to announce research from our collaboration has been published in the journal Addiction Research and Theory.

Abstract:
People who use drugs understand drugs and drug use in ways that are often different to the way knowledge of drug use is constructed within the dominant medico-legal discourse. Their experiences are, more often than not, represented in negative ways within dominant discourse, a disconnect that can create adverse consequences for people who use drugs, through the production of stigma and shame leading to poor health and social outcomes. A key difference in how drugs are understood by people who use drugs is the capacity of the former to recognize positive aspects of drug use and create more agentic subjectivities for themselves concerning the use of drugs. Using a thematic analysis of the online forum Australian Drug Discussion, hosted by Bluelight.org, we identify positive drug stories and the contexts of their emergence, as subversions or modifications of dominant understandings. We argue that positive understandings of drug use, as well as recognition of the way their expression serves to generate agency for people who use drugs within or against the confines of dominant discourse, may provide opportunities to limit further the harms flowing from stigmatization and negativity.

Through this analysis, the authors came up with some strategies about ways in which we can promote more positivity when discussing drugs:
1. Respect the unique and valuable drug knowledge of consumers,
2. Subvert and challenge stigmatising terms,
3. Favour benefit maximisation over harm reduction,
4. Recognise the diversity of drug use,
5. Acknowledge the support and altruism of drug communities.

The publisher’s version of this paper can be accessed, but if you can’t get around the paywall, you can also access a PDF of the accepted manuscript.

Feel free to comment on the paper here - we'd love to hear your views on it.

 
Could you suggest an easier link to the unlocked article or a how to for those who can't get around this so easily.

Anyway I'm reading the paper now.. I'll be back with my thoughts..
 
"A key element in the way this discourseaffects PWUD is the characterization of drugs as being per-sonally dangerous, morally evil, and constitutive of criminality"

"PWUD can become victim to self-stigmatization"

"in turn, can lead to physical (Ahernet al.2007) and mental health issues (Birtel et al.2017; vonHippel et al.2018), secretive behaviors that increase risks ofharm (Palamar2012), and even to increased drug use.."

Absolutely. The pervasive views that we as PWUD are inherently coming from or into this darker moral space absolutely gets reflected on how we feel within ourselves and often times, to put it crudely, if you're told enough times you're a bad person.. you become a bad person. PWUD can also lose some hope for themsleves as these "bad" people as a result of this both outward and self-stigmatization and it can increase the occurences, length, and intensity of relapses or maybe lead to addictions which might not have been otherwise with a more positive outlook. I know this, because, to a degree - I've been through this myself.

Web-based drug forums (also historically called online bul-letin boards) are used by PWUD to share experiences, talk about their use of drugs, and engage in commentary of drug policy. These discussions collectively form a kind of alterna-tive way of knowing about drugs that stands in contrast to the knowledge produced within dominant medico-legal dis-course. They bring into view ways of knowing that are often repressed or derogated within that discourse in a mannerthat contests the assumptions underpinning dominant know-ledge. Such forums are usually publicly accessible, though not widely popular, have coherent if sometimes tacit regula-tions, involve moderation and boundary management by administrators and/or forum users, and have implicit rules which structure the legitimacy of the content and interactions. Through this ongoing social process, they come to bemore than just ‘online talk’. While mediated by the online environment, they nevertheless constitute communities(seeHaythornthwaite2007). They are places where truths are established, contested, and remade and, more importantly, experience and identity are negotiated in common among peers, and with direct (if not always achieved) attention to safe and inclusive practices..

This is a beautiful summary of how these forums work and I think some arrangement of of these words could fo right into our mission here. It's certainly a part of my mission being here, to facilitate an open, stigma-free and educational harm reduction based environment. Some kidding around aside, this place is examplary for this kind of discourse I believe.


The results which follow here are all wonderful examples of this site and what this site is really all about. I particularly liked this quote from a member (not sure who it was as it all seems to be anonymized and anywhere between 1999-2016)
I don’t see it as bluelights job or goal to look good in the eyes ofcops, politicians, media, teachers, or any of that shit. We aren’t here to change opinions, we are here to give information. I would ask, where is the REAL HR in curbing open and honest drug discussion in the name of the already impossible goal of making this site look respectable to the anti drug community?
THAT is wonderful! And exactly how I feel about this site. Maybe I'm naive but I have little to no fear of law enforcement, exposure, or any of that from my presence on this site. What am I doing? Working as an agent to reduce the harm and potentially save lives? Yes, there are counterarguements to this but my motives are for the good, and I think mostly everyone here is on the same page. We are here to help, not to harm, or overthrow these ridiculous anti-drug stigmas which in recent years are overthrowing themselves as finally being seen for what damage they are to modern forward thinking societies. At least in Canada, a lot of progress is being made very quickly.
Equally, at an individual level, these stories can, when read by those whom discourse understands as the authorities who determine and enact policies and practices to regulate the lives of PWUD, provide important insights which help destabilize the negative assumptions about PWUD on which authoritative discourse depends. In this case, it is not just the stories themselves which matter but the evidence forhow, in negotiating the complex subjectivity of drug use, people exhibit the kinds of agency and insight into their own condition that might encourage more formal inclusionof PWUD within policy making.
I sure hope so. This would be the greener grass if this does come true as much as I'd like it to. In some ways, it already is.
And from this question emerges an important further research question: in what ways, and with what positive effects have medical and legal authorities actively included PWUD within policy formation and what impact has this had upontheir own subjectivities as expertson drug use and management?
I can say within Canada a couple anecdotal stories about this. This year I've noticed more and more front line crisis workers around harm reduction and overdose prevention looking for people with "lived experience" as one of, if not THE only prerequisite. Being someone who is, or was in it for awhile is becoming more and more recognized as the sort of person who need to be a part of this workforce. Canadian PWUDs are getting more and more of a voice as the harm reduction pill of Canadas drug strategy takes off exponentially and I see some real strides have been taken. Especially the last 2-3 years.

Actually,The International HIV / AIDS Alliance has set out guidelines specifically for hiring PWUD employees are are still in active use as people with "lived experience" now since 2015. It is no longer a point of discrimination for an HIV / AIDS worked to be PWUD by employment standards.

 
@Alex_1991 excellent feedback - thank you. Agree - that in Canada, there does seem to be a lot more acceptance that PWUD should be at the table with an active role, not just consulted in a tokenistic way. I'm not from Canada, but certainly have read a lot from Canadians that seems very promising in this regard.
 
I’m taking Sam e-800 kilograms and I’m gonna probably for life stay on the 800!milograms but tomorrow I’m gonna go back to being on70-milligram of vyvanse is it ok to take not at same to but maybe an he apart thank you😴
 
At Bluelight.org we encourage collaborative partnerships between academic researchers and our community. In 2016 we were approached by Liam Engel with a proposal to utilise data from Bluelight for his PhD, using an engaged and participatory approach. Liam is now Dr Engel (well done!) and we are thrilled to announce research from our collaboration has been published in the journal Addiction Research and Theory.

Abstract:


Through this analysis, the authors came up with some strategies about ways in which we can promote more positivity when discussing drugs:
1. Respect the unique and valuable drug knowledge of consumers,
2. Subvert and challenge stigmatising terms,
3. Favour benefit maximisation over harm reduction,
4. Recognise the diversity of drug use,
5. Acknowledge the support and altruism of drug communities.

The publisher’s version of this paper can be accessed, but if you can’t get around the paywall, you can also access a PDF of the accepted manuscript.

Feel free to comment on the paper here - we'd love to hear your views on it.

Hi guys,
Damn you are doing some highly needed research and publishing and that is ultra commendable.

I just have a question about startegy 3.

"3. Favour benefit maximisation over harm reduction,"
Is this against the policy of promoting harm reduction over benefit maximisation?

Peace and love
BBlunt
 
Salutations Tronica,

1. Respect the unique and valuable drug knowledge of consumers,
2. Subvert and challenge stigmatising terms,
3. Favour benefit maximisation over harm reduction,
4. Recognise the diversity of drug use,
5. Acknowledge the support and altruism of drug communities.

The change of look made me check, but i don't like the spontaneous idea that one issue with studies is that once defining "science" the rest no longer appears to exist. Consumption Method + Ritual + 3rd-party Interference for example, all "VILIFYING" factors perpetuating Victorian-age bigotry.

So, i do appreciate item #1, as you can imagine. And of course item #2 as well, although it's just too late for those who's "Légaleezation" practically finished putting their family ties in Black & White, actually. After a life being told about the evil sides of cannabis and its people my present provincial government persists in stigmatizing the consumers again. 1st with the re-afirmation on legal age which plain infantilizes adults, never caring to apply any fair sense of proportionality, like to consider that teenagers don't get "educated" relatively to alcohol by being left alone with a 40 oz bottle and no glass around, while in the case of cannabis one should consider that much less substance suffices to cause a major shift of context by systematically promoting dosing abuse - e.g. please do NOT read "overdose", by the way...

Considering the announced theme of this present board it's equally abusive to expect this primary objective to get relegated down the list of priorities. Although i'm in favour of NEVER making HR mandatory i see little harm at all in ALWAYS leaving the door opened to HR if that's what individuals feel like. In comparison the cigarette/"joint" format allows no such thing as it's already weighting around ~300 mg, so if i compare to vaporization that's already a major dosing boost, as i typically require 3 ~ 4 inhalations "costing" a mere 25 ~ 35 mg each at a rate of 4 ~ 5 puffs per 125 mg bowl lasting up to 4 hours. Consequently if i still were smoking today i'd face multiple problems right away:

#1 Chronic self-poisoning by combustion fumes​
#2 Destruction of nearly half the noble molecules for futile purposes​
#3 Systematic promoting of dosing ABUSE leading to long-term TOLERANCE effects​
#4 Absence of an HR smoker's alternative, including in Québec's "legal" SQdC TODAY​

No objections about items #4 and #5.

Good day, have fun! ☮️
 
At Bluelight.org we encourage collaborative partnerships between academic researchers and our community. In 2016 we were approached by Liam Engel with a proposal to utilise data from Bluelight for his PhD, using an engaged and participatory approach. Liam is now Dr Engel (well done!) and we are thrilled to announce research from our collaboration has been published in the journal Addiction Research and Theory.

Abstract:


Through this analysis, the authors came up with some strategies about ways in which we can promote more positivity when discussing drugs:
1. Respect the unique and valuable drug knowledge of consumers,
2. Subvert and challenge stigmatising terms,
3. Favour benefit maximisation over harm reduction,
4. Recognise the diversity of drug use,
5. Acknowledge the support and altruism of drug communities.

The publisher’s version of this paper can be accessed, but if you can’t get around the paywall, you can also access a PDF of the accepted manuscript.

Feel free to comment on the paper here - we'd love to hear your views on it.

Please warn me next time before sharing my personal information with a doctor I have nothing to do with so I can deactivate
 
Hello all. I'm not going to post any drug stories right now I might in the future.. I just wanted to say that I've been clean from heroin. Meth. And benzos for alittle over a month now . I'm on Subutex, buspar , gabapentin, propranolol, and wellbutrin. Anyone else got a similar story please reply or message me 😃
 
Hi all, for anyone having difficulty accessing these kinds of studies due to paywalls, theres a site called sci-hub,seat you just put in the DOI number
 
Just from years of experience I've learned how to manage the amount of whatever drug I might be taking at any given time to keep from overdose, infection and so forth. I spent the past several years addicted and now successfully in treatment, but it comes from a place of experience and not just merely drug seeking and trying to get high. I can't remember the last time I was actually high, but I can remember the number of times I've limited my usage just to stay safe..
 
Overall, I never suffered any real problems as a result of drugs. However, alcohol is a somewhat different story. With regard to drugs, I never did any truly "hard" drugs, e.g. meth, heroin, crack, coke, PCP, etc. I never had any desire to honestly. Though, I did use cannabis and psychedelics quite a bit during my college years, but I never developed any sort of "problem with drugs" per say. I never really got involved with any other substances, which is likely why in large part. After college, I didn't really do anything beyond this. For much of the time, I didn't really even use drugs at all. Later on, I did use and perhaps even overuse stimulants a bit (the last 3-4 years or so). I did drink excessively in college and also afterwards though, but I got that in check for the most part back in 2019.

The only time I ever had any truly problematic usage patterns of any substance was during the pandemic. I moved home after college, and I'm still living at home. I work from home, and they're both retired (in their late 60s and early 70s), and I have asthma fairly significantly and another slight issue that's considered a risk factor. As a result, we were all essentially not wanting to go out anywhere for obvious reasons back in 2020. Being stuck at home and limiting outings meant getting alcohol for multiple days. That combined with the boredom sent my drinking somewhat over the edge into problem territory. Prior to the pandemic, I used to just get what I wanted to have alcohol wise at the store every night. And I rarely ever drank any truly and seriously problematic amounts.

Then, that caused me to be more drawn to use stims during the day, because of the hangovers. As you can imagine, this got pretty out of hand. The amounts that I was drinking were absolutely alarming honestly, like 12 pack a night territory. Nowadays, I feel like I'm starting to get things in check somewhat, hopefully. Prior to the pandemic, alcohol did lead to me being somewhat argumentative, but that has always been due to things that were on my mind prior to drinking. The crazy amounts I was drinking during the pandemic was really the only time I feel that I was ever truly and seriously crossing the line in terms of substance use. As for whether I have had any benefits, possibly with cannabis and psychedelics.

Maybe a little bit from stimulants as well. Though, I don't think that I've ever had any serious negative effects from drugs, primarily alcohol. Which is odd since it's probably the substance that I've "liked" the least overall. I will say that psychedelics (and perhaps cannabis to an extent as well) may have helped me with problematic patterns of behavior though. And the only thing that really did essentially cause little gain and more problems instead is alcohol. Though, that wasn't even so much the case pre-pandemic and is becoming less the case now as I'm getting back to normal. And things in general are getting back to normal. Because now I have gotten the vaccine and my parents have as well. I've also never acted out in any way because of drugs, alcohol is a little different.
 
Last edited:
Nice clip from the paper. I’d be interested to know the difference between Australia and U.S. when trying to benefit from the “thematic analysis of the online forum(s)”. Seems to be a variance in the availability of more harder street stuff in Americas inner cities whereas Australia types will divert some methadone to shoot up or something. lol 😆 Honestly I just read a lot more stuff on more topics out of there like that. No offense intended & Ive been wrong before!
 
Top