[ExI] 27 psychedelics??

Mon Mar 28 07:09:56 UTC 2022

I'm going to chime in at this point.
I firmly believe that everyone who has the mental capacity to try LSD
should, I'm a firm believer in microdosing mdma for marriage counselling.
In general I'm pretty pro drugs but also pro help for those who require it
from abuse, bad reactions, etc. And i would never force it upon someone who
simply did not want that experience.
However, the idea that doctors would try all prescribed medications to know
what they feel like is ludicrous. They way I've been reading this thought
is 'all pharmaceuticals and illicit drugs', so I may have misinterpreted.
Going with what I've understood, lets take anti-depressants for an example
for pharmaceuticals. Trying a small amount as a 1 off or, for most of them,
anything less than a month would yield absolutely no experience for the
doctor. Now if that doctor did not actually require antidepressants and
they continue to "try" it for the recommended 1-3 months before deciding if
it is 'right for them' they could very well end up with serotonin syndrome.
If we're talking about dexamphetamines (adderall i think in USA) then sure
there shouldn't be any long term side effects. Like I said, I've been
reading your idea as ALL drugs, and that could end exceptionally badly. But
also consider, that's 1 person trialing 60+ medications in what time
period? What are the long term repurcussions going to be?
I understand a point, I try to help as many recovering addicts as I can,
and I especially like to work with homeless women and children because my
history lays there and I can connect on a level of experience and survival.
So yes, I know what different drugs feel like and what they do to the body,
I'm certainly not going to trial drugs I do not need or want.
Still, LSD for everyone who wants to open their mind and change the way
they think. I believe it helps with self awareness and awakening. Some
people do not feel like they would be able to handle it, that's fine. Some
people are afraid, and I especially don't recommend taking a trip with fear
in your soul. That's a recipe for disaster. Shroom body load is too heavy
for me.
My 2 cents.

On Mon., Mar. 28, 2022, 13:15 Will Steinberg via extropy-chat, <
extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:

> And I guess as a follow-up to that little paragraph I would ask WHY
> doctors DON'T try the psychoactive drugs they prescribe.  Awful side
> effects are usually rare, especially if you just try them once to see what
> they feel like.  And if you're that scared of the effects, how could you
> feel comfortable prescribing them so freely?  For someone who cares about
> intelligence, science, and information, you think it would be a no-brainer
> to gain that wealth of new information by taking the drug--information you
> literally cannot possibly obtain elsewhere, since it is essentially pure
> qualia.  To come back to the color example, imagine you had a pill that let
> greyscale-seers see color for the first time, and yet you had no idea what
> color looked like.  You're telling me you wouldn't take the drug just to be
> more knowledgeable?  Why?  Fear?  Decades of brainwashing education?  Pure
> stubbornness?  I just don't understand.  It's not that scary or difficult
> to try a mild dose of a drug.  Refusing to experience these things, if one
> is dealing in them, should be considered an overt mark against that
> practitioner.  Not singling you out; this applies to everyone, in my
> opinion.  I would consider it equal to or perhaps worse than a doctor who
> refused to read a chapter in a textbook about a drug he or she was
> prescribing, or refused to attend a seminar on the newest medical
> technique, but uses it anyway.  You simply cannot understand these drugs
> without doing them.
>
> It's sad because I would say you could pick a random, middlingly
> intelligent amphetamine user off the street and they would have just as
> much to offer in counseling someone on the use of amphetamine as a doctor
> who prescribes it.  THAT is how much information is contained in the
> experience itself.  Of course, this means that a doctor who is also
> experienced in these drugs is the clear paragon of knowledge--I'm not
> saying that it isn't extremely useful, and necessary, for a doctor to know
> how drugs work and how they move throughout the body.  I just think the
> experience is as important.  The great thing is, you don't need to go to
> school for 8 years for that part; the tough part is already done.  All you
> have to do is give yourself the experience.  And then you will be more of
> an expert than any doctor who hasn't had the experience.
>
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 10:51 AM Will Steinberg <steinberg.will at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> No, I reject the idea that you are an expert.
>>
>> It's one thing if the drugs only have physiological effects, even if it's
>> not ideal since you don't understand what the side effects feel like.  You
>> can still feel confident about their effects in a functionalist sense.  But
>> for psychoactive drugs, I think prescribers being inexperienced in their
>> actual effects is one of the reasons so many drugs are wrongly prescribed.
>> It's insane to me that--having actually taken amphetamines, for
>> example--someone could prescribe amphetamines without having experienced
>> the effects.  Because without having taken them, I am confident in saying
>> you have NO CLUE what they actually do.  The behavioral observations and
>> the physiological data tell like 1% of the story when it comes to what
>> these drugs do.  Some drugs are just about the physiological data, ok it
>> lowers blood pressure, here ya go.  No problem.  But it honestly disgusts
>> me that doctors prescribe amphetamine without knowing what it actually
>> does.  And I would bet a large sum of money that if you tried amphetamine,
>> you would be a lot more conservative in the amount of people you prescribe
>> it to.
>>
>> Yes, I am shitting on your expertise and education, because I think they
>> haven't actually prepared you to responsibly prescribe psychoactive
>> medications.  At the very least prescribers should be required to consult a
>> self-bioassaying drug geek like myself who actually knows what these drugs
>> do.
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 3:43 AM Rafal Smigrodzki via extropy-chat <
>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2022 at 10:49 PM Will Steinberg via extropy-chat <
>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't think people should be allowed to speak in such an opinionated
>>>> manner regarding drugs if they haven't tried them themselves.  It's like
>>>> saying you're an expert on the color red if you can only see in black and
>>>> white.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ### Do I need to take every drug before I prescribe it to my patients,
>>> or would you perhaps let me speak about drugs to patients based on my
>>> knowledge of the relevant published research? Because, well, I *am* an
>>> expert on neurological drugs, even if I don't take them.
>>>
>>> Rafal
>>> --
>>> Rafal Smigrodzki, MD-PhD
>>> Schuyler Biotech PLLC
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> extropy-chat mailing list
>>> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
>>> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20220328/fe880e42/attachment-0001.htm>