Lysergic Acid Diethylamide

[American_Trotskyist]

What is the truth?

[LSD]

It's very very good.

But then I'm hardly an unbiased source... :lol:

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I know that LSD does not make your brain bleed.

[OleMarxco]

But sharp pointy objects into your blood veins, do!
Anyknowhows, the "truth" is? But a figment of your imagination!
No, really... It's LSD, of course, SILLY. Don't 'chou get it?
Simon says: "Lysergic Acid Diethylamide, commonly called LSD, is a powerful semisynthetic hallucinogen and psychedelic entheogen!" Easy, HUH!? EASY AS A PIE TO UNDERSTAND! Like the one you're gettin' know in yer face, you pseudo-scientist! Lucy in the Sky of Diamonds :engles:

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Originally posted by [email protected] 4 2005, 05:40 PM
But sharp pointy objects into your blood veins, do!
Anyknowhows, the "truth" is? But a figment of your imagination!
No, really... It's LSD, of course, SILLY. Don't 'chou get it?
Simon says: "Lysergic Acid Diethylamide, commonly called LSD, is a powerful semisynthetic hallucinogen and psychedelic entheogen!" Easy, HUH!? EASY AS A PIE TO UNDERSTAND! Like the one you're gettin' know in yer face, you pseudo-scientist! Lucy in the Sky of Diamonds :engles:
I think someone is a leetle off their heads.

[OleMarxco]

You better not talk to me under the influence, or WHUT! ;)
*slips and falls*
....Lys enerrrrrrrrrrrrgic Acidos Dith Al my Mydh!
Don't diss my head.

[Soviet sally]

If its Lysergic Acid Diethylamide....why do we say LSD instead of LAD!?!?!

[American_Trotskyist]

Obviously Lysergic Acid Diethylamide is the most informed. The myths are that you can fuck yourself up forever, become skitzo, it severly hurts your brain, what is the truth?

[MKS]

LSD is bad for you, like all drugs, however responsible use is alright. Im not sure if forms a physical addiction, but it does form a psychological addiction, like marijuana.

[CommieBastard]

Like all drugs, and in fact like all objects that we interact with, it brings positive and negative results. Some might say it is up to the individual to weigh up these negatives and positives (in the assumption they are informed of them) to decide for themselves whether trying LSD (or any other things) is for them or not.

As MKS says LSD is, unlike almost all other drugs, not physiologically addictive. This means that you won't get physical addictive pangs for LSD.
What you might get is psychologically addicted, or dependant. However, it is possible to be psychologically addicted to literally anything you enjoy, as it is the fact that you enjoy it that makes for psychological addiction, and so this cannot be said to be a criticism of the thing itself, but rather the lifestyle that it is a part of. You become dependant on something when it is a singular, or one of a limited set of things, that you depend on for your happiness.
We are all essentially psychologically addicted to everything we enjoy, but it is only labelled as such when the concentration on this particular source of enjoyment begins to overshadow the capability to seek or partake in other sources, and leads to a general decline in 'happiness' or enjoyment.

Pros: LSD, as someone said, is a powerful hallucinogen, and therefore allows us to experience perceptions that are normally beyond our comprehension
It also causes a feeling of euphoria during the trip, unlike Salvia Divinorum.

Cons: LSD is said to cause 'flashbacks', where you get a period of time in which you are reimmersed in a trip which occured in the past. This can be dangerous when operating heavy machinery, such as a car, and can also lead to other problems, such as general embarrasment.
The other major negative is the risk one runs of a 'bad trip'. As far as I'm aware whether this happens is at least to some extent dependant on the mood and thoughts you have during the beggining of the trip, and what kind of person you are generally, that is to say, how you react to certain experiences, whether you are prone when panicking to panic further, or calm down...

http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd.shtml

this is a good site with info on all kinds of drugs

[American_Trotskyist]

Thank you. I have done acid but I have a very serious question, is it possible to do acid, even once, and wake up a completly different person? A rambling idiot/losing logical thought? No idiot posts, no rumors, sideline speculation or uban myths. Only people who have done it and those who have researched it unbiasedly.

[LSD]

Thank you. I have done acid but I have a very serious question, is it possible to do acid, even once, and wake up a completly different person? A rambling idiot/losing logical thought?

No.

Believe me, I've done the research and I've done the shit... that kind of psychochemically induced break is impossible with a drug like LSD. Unless your taking tricyclics or a lithium based anti-depressent (IN WHICH CASE DO NOT USE LSD!), where there's a risk of a dissosiative fugue.

But don't take my word for it, read the tesearch (http://www.maps.org/research/abrahart.html) for yourself!


The myths are that you can fuck yourself up forever, become skitzo, it severly hurts your brain, what is the truth?

Believe it or not, the myths are ...myths.


Im not sure if forms a physical addiction, but it does form a psychological addiction, like marijuana.

Well, "psycholigical" addictions are a bit like erections at 12. You can have them for anything.

The real point is that while I could, theoretically, become psychologically addicted to eating carrots, unlike nearly all other "hard" drugs, LSD has avsolutely no physiological symptoms of addiction. That means that your body does not become dependent on it in any way.


If its Lysergic Acid Diethylamide....why do we say LSD instead of LAD!?!?!

Because, since it was discovered by a German, the acronym comes from the Geman LysergSäure-Diäthylamid.

[OleMarxco]

....And only were translated to English later, as Lysergic Acid Diethylamide :D
</pointless post> Useless Trivia: It were referred to as with that name in Fallout 2 (the game), by Myron ;) Actually, the name of the DISCOVERER (not inventor&#33;) of LSD was Swiss, and his name was Albert Hophman. That&#39;s so, huh? :che:

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

Originally posted by Lysergic Acid [email protected] 5 2005, 08:35 AM

The myths are that you can fuck yourself up forever, become skitzo, it severly hurts your brain, what is the truth?

Believe it or not, the myths are ...myths.
It is not fair to say that LSD never causes people to "whig out" - if you are already psychologically unstable/schzophrenic/etc. LSD may bring yr symptoms to the forefront.

[LSD]

Actually, the name of the DISCOVERER (not inventor&#33;) of LSD was Swiss, and his name was Albert Hophman.

I meant German linguistically...but yeah.

Also, it was Albert Hoffman, not "Hophman".


It is not fair to say that LSD never causes people to "whig out" - if you are already psychologically unstable/schzophrenic/etc. LSD may bring yr symptoms to the forefront.

Well like any psychodelic experience, if you have preexisting underlying conditions, it will strongly influence your reaction.

But even those reactions are temporary and generally short-term. The risk of "[fucking] yourself up forever" is practically nil. And there are [b]no[b] physical toxicity risks, so "severly [hurting] your brain" isn&#39;t an issue either.

As for "becoming skitzo", well, that&#39;s physiologically impossible.

[MKS]

Dosent your mind get hooked on it though. Like marijuana, it becomes something you cant get through your day without, not because youll get physically ill, but because you have a great psycholgical dependence. Of course one has to account for how many times a day, week, month, a person ingests LSD, that would have an effect on any psycholgical outcome or addiction.

I know many people that are psycholgicaly addicted to marijuana, they have to smoke at least once a day (usually more), I always thought psychological addicitions were myths, but after seeing it first hand I now know the psychological power a subsatnce like marijuana has on a frequent user.

[LSD]

Dosent your mind get hooked on it though. Like marijuana, it becomes something you cant get through your day without, not because youll get physically ill, but because you have a great psycholgical dependence

No.

Hallucinogens don&#39;t tend to be psychologically addictive (with a few notable exceptions such as PCP et al.). They&#39;re too intense and heavy for one to become psychologically dependent on them in any meaningful way.


Of course one has to account for how many times a day, week, month, a person ingests LSD, that would have an effect on any psycholgical outcome or addiction.

Not really.

Psychological addiction is a rather nebulous concept anyways, but studies show that even with regular use, users don&#39;t tend to become dependent on drugs such as Acid. They simply don&#39;t have the "high" that stimulants and even some depressents do.


I know many people that are psycholgicaly addicted to marijuana, they have to smoke at least once a day (usually more), I always thought psychological addicitions were myths, but after seeing it first hand I now know the psychological power a subsatnce like marijuana has on a frequent user.

Well, marijuana is an interesting druig.

It sort of defies categorization in many ways. It certainly has a greater potential to become psychologically addictive than LSD because of the "high" it generates and because it&#39;s not nearly as intense and draining as nondeleriant Hallucinogens such as LSD.

[OleMarxco]

LAD is kinda, uh, tasteless n&#39;shit. Kinda hard to get addicted on sumthin&#39; like that, no? :wub: Here&#39;s a pic of what ya could/would see if you were under the &#39;fect of LSD, &#39;tho:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/0f/1280px-LSD_blotter_paper.jpg
Kinda cool, huh? I see pink elephants :che:

[Soviet sally]

Dosent your mind get hooked on it though. Like marijuana, it becomes something you cant get through your day without, not because youll get physically ill

I dont know what the hell your on about. Marijuana isnt addictive, and the chances of even developing a chemichal dependency are like 1 in 10.

[Guest1]

Josh, let&#39;s do some acid in the summer, but I want to take a really small dose the first time just to have a taste of the experience.

And you gotta lead me through :P

[MKS]

I dont know what the hell your on about. Marijuana isnt addictive, and the chances of even developing a chemichal dependency are like 1 in 10.

Marijuana has been proven to cause severe psychological addiction or dependence, obviously the more you smoke the greater the dependence becomes. While there are no physical symptoms of addiciton, like there is with crack or heroine, a mental dependence can be just as strong or as hard to break.

Ive known many people with such a dependence, and while im sure its not the most healthy thing to be doing everyday 3 or 4 times a day, I see no problem with it, if it makes them happy and they&#39;re not hurting anyone than i have nothing against it.

[Black Dagger]

Marijuana has been proven to cause severe psychological addiction or dependence, obviously the more you smoke the greater the dependence becomes.

In some people, but it&#39;s also possible to develop a &#39;psychological addiction&#39; to the internet or computers more generally, there&#39;s lot of things in the world that have potential to be habit forming.

[LSD]

Marijuana has been proven to cause severe psychological addiction or dependence,

Let&#39;s hold off on using the word "proven" when dealing with something like psychological addiction.

There have been studies that show that Marijuana can be psychologically habbit-forming in that, especially among those with underlying psychological disorders such as anxiety or depression, the "high" beceoms a psychopharmacological defense mechanism. But that does not mean that marijuana is intrinsically addictive in any chemical or physical sense.

There&#39;s nothing "special" about marijuana that makes it more addictive than other drugs, in fact all chemicals that create a general sense of well-being have roughly the same tendency towards psychological habbit formation. In fact, many drugs are far more psychologically addictive. Stimulants are a particularly relevent example. While some stimulants, like cocaine, are clearly physiological addictive, others are not. Stimulants are highly psychologically addictive because ...well, because they stimulate.

Yes, psychological dependencies to marijuana is possible, maybe even common, but it is not by any means representative. The vast majority of marijuana users are not psychologically addictted and never will be. Those who are are most likely so because of underlying conditions, and if it wasn&#39;t marijuana is would be something else. The point is that while marijuana is potentially habbit-forming, so is every other "high" psychochemical out there.


Marijuana has been proven to cause severe psychological addiction or dependence

And as to your use of the word "severe", it must be pointed out that not only is there no evidence that psychological addictions can be classified as "severe", the bulk of available data shows that psychological addictions to marijuana are actually relatively easy to break.

In contrast even to other pharmacologically nonaddictive but psychological habbit-forming drugs like amphetamine or MDMA, breaking psychological addictions to cannibis is almost facile. Simply put, dependency to marijuana is like any "well-being" drug, but far more subdued without any withdrawal symptoms whatsoever. With a little therapy and psychological counselling, the underlying issues can be resolved ...and the "addiction" is gone.

So, again, I would emphasize that on the scale of pyschologically addicting psychochemicals, marijuana is at the low end.


Now switching from drug expert to drug user:

Josh, let&#39;s do some acid in the summer

Amen, brother&#33;

[MKS]

If religion is the opiate of the masses, than what are opiates?

I know this is a little off topic, but arent drugs (heavy drug use, a drug culture) counter productive to the revolution?

[bezdomni]

Marx said that religion is the opiate of the masses to show that it was used as a painkiller, to soften the alienation of the labourers. Opiates, in his time, were used more for killing pain than for recreational purposes (although they still were used recreationally).

And drugs are not count-productive to the revolution. Did you ever notice that Lenin drank like a fucking fish? Marx was an alcoholic towards the end of his life.

I don&#39;t see how responsible use of chemicals could be counter productive. Unless you&#39;re fucked outta your box 24/7, you can still be a pretty productive person in society.

[MKS]

And drugs are not count-productive to the revolution. Did you ever notice that Lenin drank like a fucking fish? Marx was an alcoholic towards the end of his life.

I don&#39;t see how responsible use of chemicals could be counter productive. Unless you&#39;re fucked outta your box 24/7, you can still be a pretty productive person in society

Arent drugs a trapping of the burgoise? Dosent the use of drugs denote some kind of luxury that the oppressed usually arent allowed? If not drugs are, a tool of the oppressor, like crack in the american ghettos.



Marx said that religion is the opiate of the masses to show that it was used as a painkiller, to soften the alienation of the labourers. Opiates, in his time, were used more for killing pain than for recreational purposes (although they still were used recreationally).

dont drugs lessen the pain or alienation of the labourers today? Arent they used as an escape from the reality?

[LSD]

Arent drugs a trapping of the burgoise? Dosent the use of drugs denote some kind of luxury that the oppressed usually arent allowed?

No.


If not drugs are, a tool of the oppressor, like crack in the american ghettos.

Drugs can be used as a tool of oppression, but drugs themselves are value neutral.

While within capitalism, drug addiction often leads to subjugation, especially among the lower classes, the drugs themselves are not to blame, rather the system that requires that people "pay" is.

As for nonaddictive drugs ...well, I honestly can&#39;t see how you would consider them a "tool of oppression" since they aren&#39;t addictive.


dont drugs lessen the pain or alienation of the labourers today? Arent they used as an escape from the reality?

Yes.

But knowing what you do about capitalism, don&#39;t you think the working class seserve an "escape from reality"?

Believe me, it doesn&#39;t last.

Using drugs, even narcotics, even opiates, even regularly, it&#39;s still a temporary experience. Sooner or later ...you go back to work.

With the rare exception of those who literally do nothing but get high, drug users are still forced to deal with reality as much as anyone else. Drugs just offer a way to relax and, yes, to "escape" temporarily from the world.


arent drugs (heavy drug use, a drug culture) counter productive to the revolution?

No.

In fact fighting for the fundamental right to control one&#39;s own body and mind are a nescessary step in the revolutionary process.

If we wish to give the worker control of his labour, then we must first give him control of his body.


If religion is the opiate of the masses, than what are opiates?

The thing about religion is that it&#39;s an opiate that nobody knows about. The danger about false beliefs is that the working class does not realize that they are being sedated. When you voluntarily take an opiate ...you know you took an opiate&#33;

Furthermore, religion lasts "24 / 7".

You&#39;re never "sober" if you&#39;re religious&#33;

Whereas a drug high is temporary, a "God" high is permament and so you never are able to critically evaluate the world. As opposed to a drug user, even a regular one, who is still sober most of the time.

[OleMarxco]

Heh, heh, heh, comparing Religions to Drugs are fun, ain&#39;t it? :che:
A typical dose of LSD is only 100 micrograms, a tiny amount equal to one-tenth the weight of a grain of sand. I added an image of what&#39;s "usually seen" under LSD on the previous page, check it out "yo" ;) Check out the "researcher" of LSD (more like hobby-users of with a scientific excuse) Ram Dass (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ram_Dass) and Timothy Leary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Leary) for more information. Although they&#39;re full of shit about "spiritual" bullshit.

[Anarchist Freedom]

LSD was first synthesized by a swiss chemist named Albert hoffman. He was looking for a migraine medicine and was using Ergot. Ergot is known to get rid of migraines. The first trip which was accidental because Hoffman was touching it with his hands and it absobed through his skin. He then 2 days later took an intentional dose of about 400 ug. Which is a mighty hefty acid dose for a first time acid user. The day he took it was on april 19th it is better known among the psychedelic community as Bicycle day. LSD has many affect it will show you doors in your brain to which where never thought possible. It will make you think completely differently for better or worse. LSD tests done in holland to see the effects on schizophrenics. It showed Almost a complete reversal of effects. Many people experienced little or no high at all. They as time went by got better as opposed to medicating. ill show some reports. But right now im in school.


Also albert hoffman in 98 years old.

[LSD]

Absolutely&#33;

The medical bennefits of LSD have been documented for decades.

In fact studies with LSD have not only shown benneficial psychiatric bennefits, but also that it is an effective way to prevent or even reverse addiction&#33;

Actually, my grandfather did some of the pioneering research in this area and was one of the first to realize the clear potential of psychadelics; so I&#39;ve always had an open relationship with LSD. :lol:

[OleMarxco]

Oh? And who are YOUR grand-daddy, whut, Ram Dass or sumthin&#39;? ;)

[Anarchist Freedom]

Ram dass was one of very many people that where very important to LSD.

[Anarchist Freedom]

Some good LSD reports (http://www.erowid.org/experiences/subs/exp_LSD_Health_Benefits.shtml)

[Zingu]

I&#39;m really naive when it comes to drugs...but aren&#39;t the experince of shrooms and LSD similar? I mean, what you would experince?

[Anarchist Freedom]

They are similiar in the sense that they produce hallucionations and cause psychedelic mind change. But the thing is though LSD is way more potent longer and very different.

[getslurped123]

....I want to drop some acid. But nobody ever has any these days :(

[American_Trotskyist]

Trust me as a former Heroin addict Mary Jane is harmless and definatly not addictive. MKS you are a fool who can&#39;t give up his bourgeois beliefs, let me save you some time, God doesn&#39;t exist,
Ghandi was a capitalist
Non-Violence is a tool to dull the workers movement,
Che isn&#39;t a God
And last but not least,
Weed and LSD aren&#39;t addictive.
:D