<p dir="ltr"><br>
On Mar 17, 2016 12:11 PM, "William Flynn Wallace" <<a href="mailto:foozler83@gmail.com">foozler83@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2016 at 7:30 AM, Will Steinberg <<a href="mailto:steinberg.will@gmail.com">steinberg.will@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Yes Keith I know about a speedball. Regardless of endorphins mediating a pleasurable bodily feeling and a contentedness of mind, the correction of prediction errors and subsequent ingraining of habits in basal ganglia dopaminergic circuits is what modulates the mental hierarchy of needs. Honestly most stuff you hear about opioid peptides is pop science. Endorphins and enkephalins are much less understood than dopamine.<br>
>><br>
>> I swear I know what I'm talking about, partially by this being my field of study but more importantly by the fact that I have extremely extensive subjective experience on the matter. I can answer any question you'd have on the matter. Off list, unless this thread can be unarchived.<br>
>><br>
>> Sorry no offense to you all but I get real riled up when people without experience talk about drugs and addiction. That's just how I'm wired up.<br>
>><br>
>> OK, just what is your degree and field? As far as your own use of drugs, why would you think that that entitles you to claim any more expertise about the science of drugs than someone else? Re riled: I am fairly new to this list too and I am not the one to chide you about flaming, but I'd say that you won't gain any respect or friends by not staying objective. <br>
><br>
><br>
> One more thing: people who say that they can answer any question about something aren't scientists, or at least aren't being scientific. It's a pretty wild claim at this point in psychoneurology, eh?<br>
><br>
> bill w<br>
> <br>
><br>
> <br>
>><br>
>> Mar 17, 2016 12:19 AM, "Keith Henson" <<a href="mailto:hkeithhenson@gmail.com">hkeithhenson@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 5:53 PM, Will Steinberg<br>
>>> <<a href="mailto:steinberg.will@gmail.com">steinberg.will@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>><br>
>>> > It's not endorphins, it's dopamine. Trust me on this one.<br>
>>><br>
>>> It's both. The ultimate doper's high is cocaine which acts like<br>
>>> dopamine and heroin which acts like endorphins. This mix was at one<br>
>>> time called a speedball.<br>
>>><br>
>>> From: William Flynn Wallace <<a href="mailto:foozler83@gmail.com">foozler83@gmail.com</a>><br>
>>><br>
>>> > ?One could speculate that the people who get addicted are either low in<br>
>>> > endorphins as a result of their usual lifestyle (or perhaps even<br>
>>> > genetically low), or are high in them and the drug or whatever is just a<br>
>>> > fantastic, incredible high unattainable any other way.?<br>
>>><br>
>>> It's genetic. Only a minority (5-10%?) of people can be addicted to<br>
>>> opiates at all. The genes involved are not yet understood, but it<br>
>>> should not be hard to do given the big data bases like 23andMe.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Addition to nicotine is better understood. I don't think anyone who<br>
>>> has a double dose of the D5 version of the dopamine receptor gene who<br>
>>> is addicted to nicotine has ever gotten off some form of nicotine.<br>
>>><br>
>>> There may be a cross susceptibility between nicotine and cult rewards.<br>
>>> The scientologists are well known for their very high rate of smoking.<br>
>>><br>
>>> > ? I was instantly addicted to morphine at age 9 after ear surgery. Have<br>
>>> > not felt that good since. No pain was the very least of it. Perhaps would<br>
>>> > have been satisfied to stay that way.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Interesting. I know a few other people who are that way about opiates.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Keith<br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> extropy-chat mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> extropy-chat mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> extropy-chat mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org">extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat">http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat</a><br>
><br></p>
<p dir="ltr">Neuroscience degree. But I actually shouldn't talk about this here. All I can honestly say is that knowing something is an X agonist while experiencing it allows you to feel how the X system manifests mentally, and get clues on it a logical organization, and that can be too different from baseline of an experience to try and explain n. And I'll recap for the record, I am speaking for a friend who isn't me.</p>