I have noticed that most of the people I know that abuse cocaine are alcoholics, and dont enjoy marijuana. Also, a lot of people who smoke pot habitually dont care for cocaine.
The ‘gateway drug’ is alcohol, not marijuana
- Thread starter jay12345
- Start date
It's a choice though. IV users know there are less harmful ROA's but they choose to IV.
I personally think making edibles with good bud is silly, although it good with cuttings (that or hash) and I know vaporisation is better for me, but I like the feeling of smoking. No doubt vaporisers are good for frequent use, but different strokes for different folks or whatever stupid idiom you want to use. Just because it isn't as popular it doesn't mean those that want to will do it.
I've come to realize my expectation of the intelligence as a whole is even lower than I'd like to think... and I think pretty low.
I personally think making edibles with good bud is silly, although it good with cuttings (that or hash) and I know vaporisation is better for me, but I like the feeling of smoking. No doubt vaporisers are good for frequent use, but different strokes for different folks or whatever stupid idiom you want to use. Just because it isn't as popular it doesn't mean those that want to will do it.
I've come to realize my expectation of the intelligence as a whole is even lower than I'd like to think... and I think pretty low.
Yeah, I've read quite a bit on the subject, actually. But such reasoning, while (perhaps) sound, is purely speculative at this point. Therefore caution and moderation are absolutely needed during a time when and a culture wherein there is, at the moment, almost none. From the same website:
Obviously, it is a far better course of action to hedge your bets and err on the side of caution than to throw all inhibitions to the wind under the impression that such caution is unnecessary - unless you're really sick, of course. If that should be the case, consider vaporizing and look far and wide for alternatives with fewer psychiatric adverse effects.
I've never truly cared for alcohol, yet I actively sought out other drugs, specifically psychedelics. I had a desire for altering my consciousness in those ways from a very young age, <10 years old, before I had even been introduced to any "drugs". I always knew I wanted to trip out on psychedelics.
The whole "gateway" thing is pretty much nonsense. Sure, there may be certain certain aspects of getting high on one substance which piques curiosity in other drugs. But you cannot point to one specific causal influence to determine the path somebody chose. Consuming psychotropic quantities of alcohol is a sloppy, brainless experience that leaves one feeling poisoned, and I surely do think it should be discouraged from being the cultural drug of choice, but labelling it as a "gateway drug" to "harder drugs" is not the way to go about it. All that does is makes other drugs look worse (which they are definitely not), and perpetuates the false idea in people's minds that one can assign blame to a specific factor which can then be demonized. It's just a very clever strawman tactic in my opinion.
Additionally, I don't consider my use of "drugs" (or anyone else's for that matter) to be a bad thing which needs to be scrutinized by attempting to find out what caused it. People are hypocrites, and we are all on drugs all the time anyway, even when we think we're sober. Everyone is getting high, in their own ways. It's just that some people don't like the methods other people use, and you end up with "my drug is right and your drug wrong" ego games.
And this leads on to my next point.
I think spacejunk is very right - refined sugar was the first major exogenous high most of us were first introduced to, and that definitely had an impact upon our pleasure/reward centers during our formative years. I still consider the sugar rush to be an intense high. If you have ever fasted into ketosis (more than 3 days), then you will understand the insane psychotropic rush that any type of sugar can provide.
The whole "gateway" thing is pretty much nonsense. Sure, there may be certain certain aspects of getting high on one substance which piques curiosity in other drugs. But you cannot point to one specific causal influence to determine the path somebody chose. Consuming psychotropic quantities of alcohol is a sloppy, brainless experience that leaves one feeling poisoned, and I surely do think it should be discouraged from being the cultural drug of choice, but labelling it as a "gateway drug" to "harder drugs" is not the way to go about it. All that does is makes other drugs look worse (which they are definitely not), and perpetuates the false idea in people's minds that one can assign blame to a specific factor which can then be demonized. It's just a very clever strawman tactic in my opinion.
Additionally, I don't consider my use of "drugs" (or anyone else's for that matter) to be a bad thing which needs to be scrutinized by attempting to find out what caused it. People are hypocrites, and we are all on drugs all the time anyway, even when we think we're sober. Everyone is getting high, in their own ways. It's just that some people don't like the methods other people use, and you end up with "my drug is right and your drug wrong" ego games.
And this leads on to my next point.
I think spacejunk is very right - refined sugar was the first major exogenous high most of us were first introduced to, and that definitely had an impact upon our pleasure/reward centers during our formative years. I still consider the sugar rush to be an intense high. If you have ever fasted into ketosis (more than 3 days), then you will understand the insane psychotropic rush that any type of sugar can provide.
any addiction to a substance is a gateway drug because if that makes you feel good and you like to do it often why not try things others say makes them feel good
Transcendence;10725281 said:
Lat line there = best comment award lmao
spacejunk;10728578 said:
You bring up a good point, which many of us overlook; probably because it's technically a nutrient, albeit, probably the worst type of carbohydrate one can ingest in terms of health benefits, yet also paradoxically the best tasting.
In parenting class, they tell you that the best way to create a bond between you and your toddler - other than the massive oxytocin release which occurs during birth - is to give them a sugary snack, which will cause a release a dopamine, thereby having the child eventually regarding or seeing you as a source of a good experience. It might sound like bullshit, but it works. Case in point - baby niece of mine would always cry hysterically when I'd try to pick her up (no, I'm not that hideous) or just be around her. Anyways, I began to walk up to her with a candy in my hand but I kept my distance (about 6 feet). I'd extend my arm and wait. After investigating me for about 10 seconds, she ran up and grabbed it. After repeating that a couple more times, now she won't cry around me at all; she laughs and talks some weird language, goo goo gaa gaa.
I tried coke because I was drunk off beer.......& this is before I ever tried weed so alcohol is definitely a gateway drug.
Alcohol was my first DOC and my longest running DOC. I can't remember exactly what age i first tried alcohol but i know i had a drink when i was 7 anyway. From the age of 12 up until 21 i got drunk whenever it was possible. Everything else like Cannabis, shrooms,opiates, benzos or whatever came second. I wrecked more friendships and chances i had to make my life better in that alcoholic blur then i care to remember really 
. I quit when i was 21 due to the fact that i thought it might not be bad to live to see my 30th birthday. And i did so fuck you alcohol 
. For the longest time i never had so much as a beer but now i have the occasional beer, cider or whatever but i never drink more then a few and absolutely no liquor for me.
Alcohol is definitely the gateway drug plus when your drunk you end up trying drugs you normally wouldn't do. I know plenty of people that went right from getting hammered on booze to smoking crack and meth without even bothering to try Cannabis, shrooms, LSD, ecstasy or whatever.
. I quit when i was 21 due to the fact that i thought it might not be bad to live to see my 30th birthday. And i did so fuck you alcohol . For the longest time i never had so much as a beer but now i have the occasional beer, cider or whatever but i never drink more then a few and absolutely no liquor for me.Alcohol is definitely the gateway drug plus when your drunk you end up trying drugs you normally wouldn't do. I know plenty of people that went right from getting hammered on booze to smoking crack and meth without even bothering to try Cannabis, shrooms, LSD, ecstasy or whatever.
I remember the last (and only) time I consumed etizolam with alcohol. The last thing I remember is popping 2 out of a full pack of 10 and started on a really strong vodka/soda. I woke up with 4 etizolam and had no idea what happened.
Hey P.A, why such the hostile attitude? It's a discussion board, we're not trying to start a thesis. As I said in my post, it was something I read in a medical journal in my doctor's office that I paraphrased. I would say, however, that people who SMOKE cannabis are for sure increasing their risk of developing cancer. I vaporize it, which is pretty much the second safest ROA, behind edibles. Inhaling any combustible material is of course not safe, but a lot of cannabis smokers are also CIGARETTE smokers as well, so that muddies the waters a little bit as to lung cancer rates. I don't think any intelligent cannabis advocates are going to say that smoking blunts and joints all the time is safe, but I would bet if someone smokes joints their whole life it would be safe to say that that person has less of a risk of developing cancer or other complications than if they were a life-long tobacco smoker. People don't smoke as much marijuana by volume than someone who smokes a pack of cigarettes per day. and marijuana is barely ever sprayed with additives, etc. I don't understand your hostility, or a lot of other people's hostility and snootiness on this website. I've been lurking for years and finally signed up when I wanted to post stuff. I don't get it. Why don't you link to a confirmed case of death caused by cannabis alone? Find it, then I'll eat crow.
I totally agree, if anything back when I was spending thousands of dollars on coke, weed would stop my urges to go out and get some. Whereas alcohol would give me a serious drive to go get. Even if I had told myself I wouldn't, alcohol would give me a serious case of the "fuck-it's". So yeah I've since quit drinking also
^ that seems to be very common.
i think the point here is that 'gateway drug' is a very flawed concept, hailing back to a simplistic decades-old idea that blames drugs for people's actions. particularly in the context of kids or young people taking drugs. things have changed since those days; stigmas and ideas of what is 'normal' having shifted.
in terms of substances, it is the illegality of many drugs that causes people to escalate the seriousness of their use, but i think there is also a lot to be said for the disinhibiting effects of alcohol and the impact that has on people's drug taking decisions.
i've known plenty of people that only take certain drugs (such as stimulants or cigarettes) when they're drunk - but i also find weed often has the opposite effect, on me at least.
the whole 'gateway drug' thing is pretty silly though, it seems to me as if it is the best excuse the government propaganda machine could come up with for keeping cannabis illegal post-1960s when many people in the western world had been exposed to it and realised it is harmless.
the lies of the "reefer madness" era of propaganda were laid bare, and the forces of prohibition needed to claim that weed would lead to 'evil' drugs like heroin in order to save face and continue to demonise the people were part of the cultures that partook in such substances.
the path to drug-inflicted ruin is lack of education - not cannabis, alcohol or heroin IMO.
the boy who cried wolf is a great analogy for the failures of the drug war - we've had generations of lies leading up to this point we are at now, where untested psychoactives are sold directly to the consumer who acts as a guinea pig for the rest of mankind.
we would be much better off if humans were allowed to alter their consciousnesses with the drugs we've been using for millennia rather than pretend that this is not part of our nature, and lock people up for choosing the wrong poison.
i think the point here is that 'gateway drug' is a very flawed concept, hailing back to a simplistic decades-old idea that blames drugs for people's actions. particularly in the context of kids or young people taking drugs. things have changed since those days; stigmas and ideas of what is 'normal' having shifted.
in terms of substances, it is the illegality of many drugs that causes people to escalate the seriousness of their use, but i think there is also a lot to be said for the disinhibiting effects of alcohol and the impact that has on people's drug taking decisions.
i've known plenty of people that only take certain drugs (such as stimulants or cigarettes) when they're drunk - but i also find weed often has the opposite effect, on me at least.
the whole 'gateway drug' thing is pretty silly though, it seems to me as if it is the best excuse the government propaganda machine could come up with for keeping cannabis illegal post-1960s when many people in the western world had been exposed to it and realised it is harmless.
the lies of the "reefer madness" era of propaganda were laid bare, and the forces of prohibition needed to claim that weed would lead to 'evil' drugs like heroin in order to save face and continue to demonise the people were part of the cultures that partook in such substances.
the path to drug-inflicted ruin is lack of education - not cannabis, alcohol or heroin IMO.
the boy who cried wolf is a great analogy for the failures of the drug war - we've had generations of lies leading up to this point we are at now, where untested psychoactives are sold directly to the consumer who acts as a guinea pig for the rest of mankind.
we would be much better off if humans were allowed to alter their consciousnesses with the drugs we've been using for millennia rather than pretend that this is not part of our nature, and lock people up for choosing the wrong poison.
spacejunk;10728578 said:
I agree with this.
I'm afraid I was being sincere, although the way I worded the post may have come off as chaff. My mother was diagnosed with malignant cancer pretty much right after I was born, therefore, due to the nature of the treatment (chemo), she was unable to breast feed me. Guess what? Euphoria has always been near or at the top of the list of things I consider important to quality of life ever since my balls d... ever since I've reached puberty. Plus, I've struggled with weight issues most of my life (among other things). Wish it didn't take me nearly 30 years to learn this. If it weren't for you I probably never would have, so thanks for the heads up.