|
In Reply to: OK -U make ur point but what about what reader says and posted by Daniel on February 17, 2006 at 16:14:38:
As a retired tripper I do not think Pschotropic drugs that affect Serotonin levels in the brain are anything like LSD. I did LSD from my early teens until I ended up in the family. Approx six years of frequent use . I also lived in a place where LSD was manufactured in the millions of doses. I have done Sandoz ampules, LSD 25 and all the offshoots from Yellow sunshine,Green Froggers, Orange domes,and Starship Enterprize through to Clearlight and Windowpane. I have watched a machine pushing out gelatin impregnated LSD 25 doses at 1 per second thinking there was enough there to keep me high for ever. I have had trips to heaven and hell and I also spent years researching dope as an obsession. STP was cool but too frightening, being such a trip-hog I never thought I would ever actually not want to do STP. Mushrooms and Peyote buttons were to earthy with occasional puking. We tried inumerable ways to take them without getting sick. I also used Mescaline sulphate and ended up in the hospital tied to a gurney for a long night visiting hells half acre. In my search for dope highs I did the kind of acid that Albert Hoffman and Richard Ozley did whent the drug was first used. Ozley brought and got LSD from the same sources I got mine from, Rochdale free college, an 18 story experiment on alternative education that became a mecca for the hippie/druggie and radical culture. LSD, IMO, is a seriously dangerous drug. So is Estacy (MDA and MMDA ll).When I was 18 I sat in a car with a friend and watched him die from the early forms of this drug. His heart failed and he was gone really quick. The ongoing risk is that brain targeted drugs can reverberate through the brain's neural pathways for years. We pay for every dance guys. We are physical, chemical beings which makes taking psychedelic drugs or psychotropic medications a chemically real event which will influence our perception and following that perception, our behavior. IMO the guiding rule should be to realize the brain is the most powerful physical organ in the body and it works like a chemical production factory in some ways.
If you put gas(meds) in the tank the chemical reaction will occur and the engine(brain) runs producing horsepower(nuerotransmission based events in the synaptic clefts and neural pathways). As a result the complete organism(us!) moves! (displays respondent behavior).
One problem I notice is if you cherry pick through the large amount of research it is possible to find support for and against using brain chemistry medications. I know because I have done this myself trying to prove points in the past. The reality is that we understand some of the hows, whens or do's and don'ts of these drugs but the actual whys of their effect on the brain is still an wiley area of mystery. In case conferences regarding these medications I have heard every position articulated wisely by well trained, sincere people with broad bands of experience. The fact is that some of these drugs work for some and not at all for others. Some have serious side effects for certain patients. Some work wonderfully. The big pharma kingdoms manipulate results from start to finish. There also are inumerable agendas working in this field. The potential for profits or losses are staggering. What really is the mind killer overall( no pun intended) is that sometimes they work and sometimes they don't. Take Effexor XR, ( SNRI, time release venallfaxine, anti-depressant) for example; Regular release effexor was first used as an antidepressant only. One side effect that cropped up was reduced anxiety levels. Reformed or retinkered into a version with timed release added is used as a specific intervention/treatment of anxiety disorders. Interesting drug but... side effects were wide banded, it worked for some not for others, some got more anxious, some could not adjust to physical side effects others had little or no problems. A real little SOB of a drug that can work wonders in some and create very notable negative effects in others. Most if not all of these drugs carry risk/benefit potential. Or the always controversial Ritalin which is a drug that is related to amphetamines. It works by stimulating the area of the brain that deals with behaviour inhibitions. The problem is that is has an intensly debated effective rate of 8 - 30%><(depending on the survey data used) on children and notably less on adults. I have seen Ritalin work wonders and really hurt others. Over the last few years treatment is leaning towards atypical anti-psychotics such as Risperidone. All of these are not to be used lightly or fooled around with like some have been known to do.
You might not get an LSD reaction but you could reach a level of perception psychosis where suicide seems a reasonable course to take. I have been on both sides as a worker and a patient. There are no magical rides in mental health issues. I get tired of both the drug and anti drug treatment activists. In any given situation both views can be right or wrong it seems.
I also learned clinical trials have to be looked at suspiciously until clearly proven valid. I believe the guiding principle should focus on searching for objective ways to grade a particular drug for levels of risk and specific negative indicators. There are no risk free drugs. All agents carry some level of risk through the spectrum of potential problem responses. We need a scale system that measures a drug's effects with no frigging thumbs allowed on the counterbalance mechanism for anyone. Forgive me if I sound preachy or know it all but I spent a long time seeing the impact of these drugs on others, particularly children and young adults. You really learn what hell is when a patient,client or friend dies from problems associated with drug therapy and their personal mental health issues.
Sincerely
RockyBoobboa
