absolutely. If everyone in the world tripped an 8th of shrooms, the world would be a lot better place. completely serious. Adhd medicine, sure, we would be more productive, but our incentives would stay the same. you just work a lot harder for those incentives.
There was just a press release from the Alzheimer's association basically stating "We hate to tell ya this, but, nothing's really working". They better ramp up those drug development efforts. In all seriousness, since I have no gods no heroes, what really keeps me going is the collective ancestors of ours knowing that they lived thousands upon millions of years surviving on this earth through the most harshest, treacherous conditions because for some reason they thought it was worth it. And now we know "better" than them cuz we have computers. Really each passing day is closer to the next disaster if you want to look at it that way. Everything is an inevitability, no guarantees of anything. All you can do is approach it like all past humans did with the belief of "hope it aint me". We'll still probably need plenty of drugs though, both enhancing and illicit.
I agree. I think an LSD weekend field trip ought be a requirement for Freshman Lit. There is a certain Enlightenment that can be achieved in a 19 year old that can serve their mental health. All you need is Love.
i'm all about gene doping. lol i support the notion of responsible taxpayers having greater access to adderol. mock if you will, but i am a better employee/worker in general when i take it. i don't use it all the time, but i (and MANY others i know personally) feel it helps provide energy, focus, and concentration. this particular drug doesn't have a 'high' associated with it.
beat it, ya bum! Spoiler medical screenings would be required... wouldn't want to get sued or in other legal trouble for carelessly giving a schizophrenic/or otherwise mentally imbalanced kid LSD...
Actually, there are studies that show LSD can have a therapeutic benefit in treating schizophrenia in children.
Ok, but make sure they don't try to drive a car or operate heavy machinery. DO NOT DRIVE!!! TRUST ME, DON'T TRY TO DRIVE.
conclusive, or inconclusive studies...? just looking them at a glance... knowing the effects of LSD and the effects of schizophrenia... make it seem counterproductive... would this be in small, infrequent doses... or routinely..?
Most research got halted back when the drug earned it's "bad" reputation but it showed some promise. Just recently on NPR I heard that some researchers are trying to revive interest. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126215920 http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/lsd/autism.htm http://journals.lww.com/jonmd/Citat...utic_Effects_of_Lsd__A_Follow_Up_Study.4.aspx
Has anyone really figured out what this thread is supposed to be about? I read something about taking things bad for you in order for them to do something good for you. Am I off base? Certainly, taking things considered bad for you can be either good for you, or simply not harmful. Someone could say I allegedly have some knowledge of these things, although I would deny it. Is that what we're talking about?
the thread was supposed to boil down to the question: Would it be morally wrong to legalize a drug if it increased societies productivity but reduced lifespans. Make it a fictional drug if you want, like a mental steroid that takes 10 years off your life.
seems it's not entirely conclusive..... and it's still remains a matter of "depending on the individual".... and there's no real set dosage, approach, hypothetical, theoretical bases for the administering of this treatment as mentioned by the second article.... possibly due to the halt in research.... still it seems odd that such a--for all intents and purposes--psychosis-like inducing drug... it offers some benefit to actual psychosis sufferers... but of course, I imagine any form of dependancy and developing abuse would still provide worsened outcomes... as all drugs would... though this specifically worsening that which it would be used to alleviate...
actually, I've always been genuinely curious about "psycho drugs", all the while being fearful of them... as I've always considered my imagination being one already vast and limitless... and as an old aquaintance once told me, when queried by myself about the potential individual results... "Well, it depends. For example: You could give our idiot friend here all the acid in the world and it's not going to have all too englightening results"... which I took to mean, that the more mentally capable, imaginitive, the the greater the effect.... the more intense the "trip"... and looking at the permanent results of Roky Erickson and Syd Barrett, for example... I chose to pass everytime I was offered...
Keep in mind that Roky and Syd took a LOT of drugs and not just LSD. When you say "psycho drugs," are you referring to all psychotropics or just hallucinogens?
why should drugs even be illegal, drugs that contain no additives, require no procedures to produce them, anything that simply grows from the ground (mar1juana) should be legal. why can someone tell me a free human being that i can not grow a plant, its a plant, whether i eat it or smoke it shouldnt make a difference, the fact of the matter is its a freaking plant and the government shouldn't be able to regulate and ban every substance because it threatens existing order, i.e. hemp industry threatening the paper industry. certainly drugs can be good for humans, they can also be bad, the one word americans have failed to master: moderation
Actually, the VAST majority of Americans have mastered moderation. A very small percentage of people become problem drug users, most people have the ability to self regulate and exercise personal responsibility.
