This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Drug experimentation and dependence

Jump to new
I've known various people to come unstuck on drugs. All started out with no intention of making drugs their life it was just recreational fun and a bit of excitement/adventure.

Out of the drugs that they were using, speed featured pretty prominently as a life wrecker and one that people seem to find hard to keep under control so I'd be advising serious caution on that front to those out there using it recreationally. Alcohol is also the other nasty one - and a lot of people that get off other drugs still end up with a very bad alcohol problem that potentially is more damaging than the rest put together. I think alcohol is greatly underrated for the damage it causes vs illegal drugs, and there's a lot of hypocrisy about the way society views and accepts alcohol (including binge drinking and mild alcoholism) vs other drugs.
 
Thanks Jessica

Thats good so far, but I guess the main thing I am curious about is how do you know when it is starting to adversly affect you health, eg heart, kidneys, cognitive function and memory?

For example I like my red wine and beer and odd spirits etc, and I can find research that shows, and GP's and cardiologists often agree, that small rates of beer and wine can be benifical for your health, then higher rates start to be detrimental.

Provided I have good cognitive function and memory, I can make reasonable decisions to go to my doc for blood tests etc to moniter my heart and kidney health etc. It's the cognitive function and memory that I am particularly curious to monitor.

The old adage 'you don't know what you don't know' applies here if it starts to affect you and if as you suggest, do it with company, and the company is doing it too, they are probably not going to be in a good position to judge when your cognitive function and memory is starting to decline.

How can you be sure? Do you get a medical check up occassionally?

I know I am not dumd. I did my undergraduate a bit later than most and got one of those Golden Key International Awards. But coming from a traditional country background this is a bit foreign so I am just trying to get up to speed (no pun) as fast as I can. But, since then I have a bit of trouble keeping my ego in check and I want to maintain my 'brain power'. Thats the best high I have experienced so far.
 
2020hindsight said:
thought for the day
The Secret To (a drug-free) You! :
Click to expand...

I personally think that deluding people with stuff like this about how perfect life is/can be is where many of these problems stem from...media portrayal over and over and over again of how life is for other people...and you can be one too!. Better to tell people the stark reality...life is a series of ups and down...seasons if you like, or if you're an Elliott Waver you might say 5 steps forward 3 steps back (!) and when you are facing set-backs that is the time when one should most avoid drugs and alcohol. Still, its usually the first place people look...why is that? Human nature.
 

gorilla,
maybe I could have said it better ...
a) option TM - meditation, - the more you practice the better you get, faster you reach a state of peace with the world, healthier your mind, soul, heart, blood pressure, etc. - to the point incidentally, where meditation has been able to cure people of cancer (documented)

or

b) option E - the more you use it the more "tolerant" you get (as in "immune")- plus the greater the risk of addiction etc etc .

Culture based ? maybe call it the American "get-yourself-into-an-unhealthy-lifestyle-then-buy-a-drug" response to stress rather than the Buddhist response

m8 , "Recreational use" is not (as I understand it anyway - as Jessica paints it anyway) in response to set-backs, it's about a way to get happy fast.

A hypothetical - Suppose you and the missus go to a beach house every weekend, and you always pop a pill (E or whatever), - then, one weekend you forget em - I guess the test for whether you're addicted or not is if you still enjoy yourselves without drug assist (yes? just thinking aloud btw) .

Seems to me

a) its a real mistake to try it once, but
b) doubley mistaken to take it a second time.

You are inviting the intrusion of the mental crutch IMO
(to say nothing of supporting an industry with a lot of ugly "hangers-on" - and screwing up countries like Columbia in the process - not that they'd go broke if Jessica stopped her habit btw )
 
I guess at the end of the day, i'll keep doing what i do and you'll keep doing what you do.

Life rolls on........................we are both happy doing as we do.

The fun police will keep banging on about how people shouldn't do this and how they should do that and drug use will grow expodentially, nothing will change and nothing will be resolved.

What can you do hey?

JW
 
Jessica
hi- diddley-ho, neighbourino


sounds like we'll just have to argree to dis-diddley-sagree.
hey Jessica - you think You have problems !!?

my pro-diddley transcendental-diddley medi-diddley-tation argument will probably-diddley make George Pell and Fred Nile accuse me of flirting with the diddley-devil!!

I think you are suggesting we all go back to being Homer Simpsons yes?
I guess just as long as we keep hearing our conscience - and by that I mean - Marge's voice (lol) in the background - the sense of reason etc.

What's the answer? ahhh - the answer is doh-ing in the wind , grasshopper.

btw - this just for a laugh ok?
 

Attachments

  • harry shearer2.jpg
    42.6 KB · Views: 115
  • harry shearer3.jpg
    13.2 KB · Views: 119
2020hindsight said:
btw - completely off topic - but here is an example of Harry Shearer's website ( Ned Flander's voice) - bludy clever -
Click to expand...
2020, You start an interesting and thoughtful thread which has generated some quite useful discussion and then you go and stick something completely irrelevant in amongst it!!!

I don't want to be rude/impatient, irritable, but if you want to talk about the "Simpsons" how about starting a "Simpsons" thread.
 

Good luck with your line of thinking. I’ve lost countless friends who suicide when they have developed schizophrenia (one tried to murder 3 people) and had an episode from our friendly marijuana. Lost 2 to heroin. And seen a good portion destroy their minds on e and ice. Everyone starts off thinking like you do. Popping pills doesn’t make you an expert.

I don’t care if you use it. But legalizing and creating a huge problem when we have enough to deal with already is plain stupid. Go take a brain scan after a few years you might be shocked to find what you see.
Good luck with the side effects....
 
well it's a very fine thread connection to the thread, I concede ...
but here goes, I 'll attempt to point out it's not "completely irrelevant" as you say :-

a) Jessica says that the "Ned Flanders of the world" should back off and stop criticising "liberated" drug-use. They are a large part of "the problem" (as I read her posts)
b) I find myself having to argue against that - especially as she's arguably branding you and I as Ned Flanders types - a closer study of Ned Flanders is then justified IMO
c) I point out that sure, Ned Flanders may be something of a do-gooder religious fanatic, (to the point of being sickening I think I read somewhere) , but that
d) Marge and Lisa are also very straight on these matters
e) also (more importantly) Marge and Lisa arguably THINK fairly straight on these matters

e) sure, peripherally , I discover that Ned enjoys a beer - so he's not a complete wowser
and then
f) Homer is just a loose cannon - he epitomizes the "Joe Average" in us all - and is a massive danger to himself if he doesn't start to think things through (and stop just doh-ing in the wind)

In the end I conclude (I think ) :-
1) we should all guard against the Homer Simpson in ourselves
2) we should all try to think more like Marge or Lisa

and finally
3) even a person who believes in TM (which I think is brilliant personally, the answer to drug-induced euphoria might be meditation- induced euphoria yes?) is going to get in trouble with the Ned Flanders of this world - or if not the Ned Flanders then the George Pells and Fred Niles of this world - because "as every church-going person knows" (sic) , when you meditate you expose yourself to invasion from Satan.

so I still think it's not totally irrelevant
..........

ok ok I change my plea to guilty --- because I then discover that Harry Shearer has a brilliant website - taking up the cause of New Orleans, the incompetence of the domestic response to the flooding, the plight of the Burmese, etc -

and lol I find I REALLY agree with this man behind the voice of Ned Flanders

PPS Somewhere along the way, I think I offered to make a deal with Jessica - that I'll wind back on alcohol, then she should be prepared to wind back on "other" drugs. - and if she has a couple less pills because of this thread, (and lol if I have a few less wines / beers whatever ) well then it won't have been in vain

PS bludy good idea to start a Simpson's thread btw - maybe on one of the existing comedy threads ??
 
back on thread.
The comparison "alcohol vs pot"
I recall a debate on TV as if it were yesterday , "that marijuana should be legalised" - back in the late 60's
- Don Chipp was Minister for Customs and Trade - (I think) - was arguing whip for the No's.
a) stick with the devil you know
b) stay away from the other (pot)
c) possibly not much difference between them on social impact (I think this is where he was right) , and
d) possibly not much difference between them on mental health impact (I think this is where even he was wrong)

Now as a young idealist at the time, I considered he was just an old fool.
But now that I'm the same age that he was then lol - I reckon he was probably being "an old realist" (pragmatist?)

and - although it's taken me 40 years to arrive at this conclusion, I think I agree with him

PS Fines can be minimal - but nevertheless, I think I believe that it shouldn't be readily available at Woolies or Dan Murphy's or even (easily available) at the Chemist for that matter. (IMO)

The counter argument ... (well reasoned - maybe I'll keep an open mind for a few more days )
Cowboy cop wants Drug War ended
 
at risk of being accused of irrelevance, I post some Ginsberg poetry - as originally posted by Chops
He also lost friends to drugs it seems. - back in the "tame" old days - before the really strong **** our kids can get now

An advertisement for drugs this is not.!!
in fact you'd have to assume a cetain element of regret, and admission of error, surely


https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?p=90969&highlight=ginsberg#post90969

HOWL-GINSBERG - 6 minutes!! - and even that doesn't have it all lol
(You'll get the ghist after the first coupla minutes) ...

Btw, the following text is less than half - he's just getting warmed up here lol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howl
 
hey Julia -
maybe it would help if you thought of me as a #6 canine personality
 
A great discussion on pros and cons.

The fact is, good or bad, right or wrong, recreational drugs are endemic in our society. While recognizing the lives drugs have wasted, many people use without problems. The lady that could have been my sister in law, has used marijuana regularly her entire life, plus the occasional line or pill every now and again... and she is now sixty. She leads a normal life, holds down a responsible job blah blah blah.

I have no problem whatsoever with people who use drugs in this way. I do have a problem with people juiced up on something or other behaving like idiots in public... and that includes BOOZE.

I don't use myself, but went through the typical adolescent experimentation stage. Would I use today? There is one psychedelic I would try if the opportunity arose (this "drug" is legal in certain countries), but otherwise, no.

My Choice.

The question in my mind is this; and I think it is the main question around the whole debate: Should users of recreational drugs be made into criminals?

As greater that 50% of people have used at least once, it would seem ludicrous that greater than half of us are intrinsically criminals, including many coppers, lawyers and parliamentarians.

I say no, a user is not a criminal. Furthermore, I would like to see the criminal element removed from the supply of drugs. The preposterous "war on drugs" is not working and I think some lateral thinking is in order to achieve this. A regulated market for instance?

As we all know, prohibition was a freakin' disaster with alcohol, and it is a freakin' disaster with drugs as well. I not suggesting open slather legalization either.

They say insanity is doing the same things and expecting a different result. Well I say on that basis, the current regime is insane. Let's try something different.

Cheers
 
i think that if 'manufactured' drugs such as LSD and E were made to specification by government/industry it would take the unkown element out of drug taking, hence probably resulting in more use, but having a much greater control on it.

Im not too sure about weed, as that is grown so i dont know how you could control its 'potency'. but with E for example you could have different strengths or whatever, just like you do with alcohol.

im not endorsing it, i just think it makes sense.
 
just a sample of the many artists who could still be here
stating the obvious again ...
Michael Hutchence
Andy Gibb
(obviously no need to listen to the full youtubes)
Michael Hutchence- I'm just a man tribute

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Gibb
Andy Gibb - Words & Music (1975)
Wish you were here-by robin Gibb
 
prawn_86 said:
i think that if 'manufactured' drugs such as LSD and E were made to specification by government/industry it would take the unkown element out of drug taking, hence probably resulting in more use, but having a much greater control on it.
Click to expand...
That's the big glitch in the whole legalization/decriminalization route, and the one most unacceptable to anyone who has children. If that concern could be addressed somehow, it might get some legs.

It would take a ballsy administration to give it a go to see if it worked or not, until then, it will be "no way Jose".

Another comment I'd make is, governments won't do what is best, they'll do what looks/sounds the best. "The war on drugs" is bullsh!t, but it sounds like they are trying to tackle the problem, especially to parents who franticly try to steer their children away from drugs (understandable, but who will happily give them alcohol at 14-17 years).

No win.
 
yep,

See my blog or the drought thread for my opinions on the current governing in Aus. No-one cares anymore.
 
Check on the research reports from the Netherlands and their free thinking to drug use. It's not leagalised per se, but a blind eye is taken to most things that don't affect others. As of a couple of years ago the debate has now opened on the effects drugs are having on others.


cheers,
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GLP-1 agonists; diabetes drug and now weight loss
2 3 4
Replies
61
Views
12K
qldfrog
Ozempic: Magic Pill or Devils Bargain?
Replies
10
Views
2K
sptrawler
The Fascist future
2 3
Replies
49
Views
2K
qldfrog
As I age others are as insufferable as when I was intolerant
Replies
5
Views
607
farmerge
Are you Face blind or can you remember absolutely everyone?
Replies
8
Views
665
finicky
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...