LSD - Unbiased facts on side effects needed please

G'day everyone,

I am new to this forum and am hopeful there are knowledgable people here that can help me.

I am a very spiritually minded person and over time have gradually been exposed to the world of psychedelics. As most of you can probably relate, at first I was against drugs due to the influence of society. But over the past year I have begun to question why psychedelics are illegal if so many people claim to be benefiting from them.

I had my first trip supervised by an experienced person recently, for the sole purpose of a spiritual experience. I didn't experience ego death, but spent a good deal of the time addressing issues I never knew I had. All in all I can't say anything but positive things about that experience.

I would like to know of any negative side effects as I have contradicting information. I don't know who to trust for this. I have spoken to a paramedic about his experiences with people under the influence. But obviously he doesn't see the positive side in his line of work. I can't deny what I now know from my first trip, but how much risk is involved?

 

The physical risk using LSD is minimal to nonexistent. Very small, barely noticeable side effects.
Where the risk comes is on the mental side of things. Acid or any psychedelic can really act as a light source during trips, they can open you up and make you experience parts of yourself that you've been hiding from, and they also tend to make people question their beliefs, which is always a good thing.
The flip side to that, is when people lose objectivity. I've noticed a lot of acid users are fond of questioning the beliefs they held before tripping, but will not under any circumstances question the beliefs they have after they tripped, because they are "undeniably true".
Which isn't really a "side effect" in the traditional sense of the word, it's just one of the more common vices that psychedelic users tend to fall prey to.
I guess what your asking is what are the chances of going insane, and as far as I know the chances are pretty slim, although speaking honestly it truly does happen to people.

 

This may help;

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:qGGR_ehqIb0J:www.clusterbusters.com

 

Thanks for your help guys. I see that most of the side effects are mental, which I completely understand if you use it innappropriately and don't know what you're dealing with. Unfortunately I guess it's these people that end up in an ambulance. With this constant negative abuse it would outshine the positive side to it, constantly comfirming to the non thinking public that it's a bad thing all round. I am learning how frustrating it can be when people refuse to even try to understand this. Never mind, let it go lol.

 

I would even go so far as to say that the psychological negative affects are extremely rare.

Remember, even alcohol can act as a catalyst in bringing about latent mental disorders.

If you have no disorders (and even if you do in some cases) you will be fine.

 

Thing is Natalie, being part of a coherent group of people is important to human beings. If you trip too much you have to start thinking about everything again because previous assumptions of yours always become questioned. If you can rework yourself happily into society then all good, but often people do not have the tools to do this . Who decides whether a person is legally a 'cool person to trip with'?

 

The biggest psychological problem I find with people who use LSD is that they have incredibly strong convictions regarding certain new philosophical revelations they've realized while using the drug. As long as you're not stupid enough to change the way you think just because you've 'realized' something on LSD, you'll be okay. Be as self-aware as possible, and remember that you've just used one of the most powerful, chaotic psychedelic substances there are. There is nothing in the psychedelic experience which merits a serious change in perspective on your life, aside from, perhaps, being nicer to others and yourself, which is harmless. Whatever metaphysical or spiritual knowledge you encounter should be recognized and reflected upon, but still questioned.

Other side effects include long-term mood and visual changes. (Chronic tracers for visual changes; I have them; they're not really distracting or anything, but it's sorta scary that I may have permanent changes to my visual system.)

 

Hmm,

I am not sure I agree with the above posters about the worst danger. I find this danger to be pretty unlikely to be too severe unless the person is using large amounts on a regular basis. The mind only has so much plasticity, and although lsd does increase this, depending on ones' social circle, long terms effects are likely to be limited. Social environment has a greater impact in most cases then solitary events.

This points to the greatest actual danger of lsd. It has to do with set and setting. Lsd does in fact increase the plasticity of one's mind for a period of time. So the thing to think about is who you trip with, and what happens in your environment while on the drug. Being around people with extreme belief structures can allow them to have an influence on your own thinking.

The greatest danger, in my opinion, is the potential for a an intensification of the long-term effects of any trauma experienced while on the drug. This is where the really intense bad trips and the legendary long-term damage generally comes from. If you have something occur that would scar you even sober, it may scar you far more intensely on lsd.

So, mind who you trip with. Find safe places to be. If you're going to use it often, touch base with people you consider 'sane', or grounded, or rational regularly.

 

Side effects of LSD include euphoria, delusions, and a tendency to "flash back" at a later time, often culminating in murder or suicide, and possibly rape. All guns, knives, pencils, and other sharp, heavy, or otherwise dangerous objects should be kept out of the reach of those who have taken LSD for a period of no less than the rest of their lives. Those who have been exposed to LSD should not be allowed to operate motor vehicles, due to the violence inducing manner in which flashbacks manifest themselves.

If someone you know has taken LSD in the past, they should be immediately secured. If they weigh over 150 pounds, two pairs of handcuffs are advisable. Do not let someone's status as a loved one influence you, they are not sane or trustworthy human beings any more, not handling them properly could make you next.

 

I think there is a reasonable cause as to why it is illegal. To be fair to both sides of this topic, I think the most fair thing to say is that people abused it in the 60s. People were taking it like crazy, yes some saw the spiritual aspect that you searched for on it, as well as some to most of the people on here do. But the truth is, most people abused it, and that should be illegal.

Then, I think this may be my bias, but I'd like to think it's a fair assessment: In a capitalistic world, drugs will never be legal, because they stop the higher ups from possessing control. If the whole world sees value in material, the higher classes will always win. They are focused on greed, but when other people are on a different system of happiness, a path of spiritual learning, they loose control. They don't want people doing drugs, it takes them off of the material world, a world of greed that inspires us to move on. In a perfect world, we would learn to learn, we would learn for the sake of making the world a better place, not because we can control people through materials and create a consumer based economy. Think about it, the technology were seeing now, is WAY behind where it should be, I understand we went through a technological enlightenment, but now were not expanding on technology, were just reshaping the way we see it, in order to get money. The iPAD, is technology we've had years ago, used for entertainment. We could really learn more about the world if we decided to, people are just unaware of how powerful these substances are.

When capitalism dies, I think drugs may then be looked at again in a different view. I love your story tho, it's perfect, I wish the whole world would be able to do that, because once we actually have experience with it, we see differently than once before.

 

There is not "reasonable cause as to why" LSD is illegal. There is no acceptable excuse to outlaw any particular use of my brain, much less an excuse that involves what OTHER people are choosing to do with THEIR brains.

 

^^True

IMO Kind of a pointless argument really, I mean look at it, drugs are illegal, but there's still people that do them. HELL, there are even places like this forum where we talk about them. Legalizing it would just make it more convient... people would still judge stoners if it were legal, so it's irrelevant.

 

Then too Big Macs, gambling, sex for any reason other than pro-creation, Ben&Jerrys ice cream and video games should all be outlawed. People can and do abuse almost anything.

Drugs are legal. Some are. Alcohol, tobacco and "approved" pharmacuticals. And that, fits in nicely with your thoughts on control.

Kudos tho, on your thoughts. From here it seems you've seen one of the most valuable things lucy has to offer. The change in perspective, the ability to see issues in different ways and to examine and question belief systems.
Someone once said the life not examined is not worth living... something like that.

 

Your only partially correct. You are correct in the assumption that the widespread use helped push it to be declared illegal, but let's take a look at actually why.

In the 50's and early 60's all the LSD in circulation came from Sandoz. When their patent on it ran out in 1963 other company's also began producing it, as well as clandestine labs, and that's when it all started to go downhill.
When Sandoz lost the exclusive patent rights, the FDA also reclassified it as a "medical research chemical" which tightened restrictions. But that actually had little to do with it's being outlawed. What happened is these clandestine labs were churning out doses that were just too fucking strong, 200-300ugs on average, as compared with Sandoz's standards of 25ug and 100ugs. When you have people and kids dropping 300 mics, well there was a sharp rise in emergency room visits, mostly due to the bullshit hype being propagated by the government and idiots on the street.
So in that regard you are correct, but that is only a very small part of the drama.

You also have to consider the times and political climate. You had Vietnam in full swing and the U.S. sending more and more troops over there each year. You also had the civil rights movement also gaining steam and a lot of momentum and support, much of it from the music industry.
And you also had a growing populace of young people approaching voting age who grew up in the "idealic" 50's, only to be faced with violence and civil unrest as they grew into their teens/early twenties.
Now lets throw into the mix marijuana, already the drug of choice for many in the folk music/beat world whom a lot of kids looked up too. Now you also have this other substance, LSD, thrown in there as well.
Problem with both of those is they do have the unique ability to cause a person to step back and question values and actions that they previously just accepted. And you had a lot of kids coming home in body bags.

So you have the makings of a perfect political/social storm brewing.
On one side you have a governmental body that is deeply entrenched in the values of yesteryear as well as billions of dollars wrapped up in a war.
On the other side you have a rather large population of baby-boomers coming of age and more importantly, voting age. Now this group of young adults begin too seriously question the values of yesterday and the war.
Bring on the protest's and civil rights marches. Now all this is transpiring pre 1965, and LSD is still legal and marijuana is actually in a legal limbo, (Leary challenged the marijuana laws of the time before the supreme court and won, marijuana was technically legal for a few short months, the exact year evades memory at the moment)
This presents a big problem for those in government at the time, because those damn kids were getting louder and making some pretty damn good arguments.

Now lets take a brief glimpse at other drug laws and how/why they exist

Opium and other opiates were criminalized in response to the immigrant Chinese who were brought over to help build the railroads in the late 1800's.
Cocaine was criminalized as a way to further oppress and persecute the black population in the south.
Marijuana was criminalized as a response to the Mexican immigrants along the southern border, most notably Texas.
All the above is historical fact that can easily be researched, I'm not making it up.

That lays the groundwork and shows the precedent of declaring a substance illegal not because of the actual substance, but rather as an attempt to "control" or demonize an "undesirable" segment of society.
The same holds true for LSD. This time it wasn't a specific racial group that was the target, but a generation. Demonize the preferred mind-altering substance a group uses, and you demonize the group by proxy and help nullify and invalidate what they have to say. "It worked before, why not now?" was the mentality.

As we approached the later 60's doses began to drop in strength and more experiential information was available, so less emergency room visits.
But by then LSD and those who use it had been demonized in the media and minds of the general population. The damage had been done. On October 24, 1968 LSD was declared illegal in the U.S. and through coercion and "keeping up with the Jones'" mentality, it was soon declared illegal around the majority of the world.

So LSD was declared illegal as a political maneuver more than any type of "public safety" motivation. That was just what was used to gain popular support for the law.

Remember current drug laws as enacted in 1970 have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the harm a substance does, but rather the medical efficacy of said substance. The reason for that is the declaring a substance illegal technically is unconstitutional, but thanks to the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906, substances can be "controlled" based on issues of medical use and "public safety". The public safety component has nothing to do with kids freaking out on LSD, but the patent medicines that were completely unregulated at the turn of the century. People were dying and becoming addicted to morphine, heroin and cocaine without even realizing they were consuming those substances. By the time LSD came on the scene, such "medicines" were no longer an issue, with labeling and full disclosure of ingredients being federal law.

Bottom line, politics played a much larger part in LSD and many other drugs being "controlled" (actually no drugs are "illegal" in the U.S., they are just "controlled".) than any questions of harm or public safety.
Thus ends my dissertation.

 

Agreed! The bottom line in my opinion is if people in high positions loose their control over other people, they're power seems less important. And at the end of the day, that's what all politics seems to come down to, a lust for power. And power is allowed through restriction, and control.

 

I believe this is a tad near-sighted, Lotus. Technology evolves in a manner unlike biology, i.e. it both immediately trascends itself and improves itself slowly with prototypes and failed supposed advantages. Between any major novel breakthrough in technology you will always have a period of stagnation in which failed attempts make their debut, only to fold back into the forgotten pages of history as they are replaced by something far superior. If you take our current situation, then demagnify and zoom out perspective to include the last several thousand years, you will find that we are developing new technology, deepening our comprehension and expanding our reach at a relatively rapid rate. Complaining about an iPad is no different than complaining about a VHS tape, or the early Phonograph. The difference here however, is that the iPad is the creation of a company influenced by a man who not only took LSD as inspiration, but as a spiritual tool... surely the irony is made manifest to you? Now look at the evolution of life on the planet, which transcends but includes, trancends but includes, transcends but includes... it only renders obsolete that which is illusory... you do not find prototype bird wings, right? We went from sea to land to air with no record left of HOW... it just sort of, well, happened and this is what I mean by immediate self transcendence. The very basis of which is heirarchical in nature, something which, on the surface, seems to be totally at odds with the ecstatic mystical experience as it pertains to LSD, or, say, Hinduism. Oneness as a religion belongs to a country that has retained a rigid class structure in which only the preists, or the brahmans, could know the higher truths. A bit paradoxical, eh? But no, it is not, because evolution, now stay with me here... transcends and includes! Our point of view, as is any host to consciousness's point of view, is limited to the confines of our position in this heirarchy. Until this position is transcended, we cannot perceive anything above, only within and below. Whether or not we are due to transcend this position is conjecture at best, but the least we can do is try, right? Sorry to get into it so much, I just wanted to clarify why I thought your opinion was a little bit near-sighted. Not neccessarily wrong, just too confined. Of course I would not argue that an iPad is a worthless piece of trash and we could be doing far greater things, supposedly...

 

But they're so shiny and clean looking, they have to be the most awesome thing to come along in the last 10,000 years, don't they?

 

One man gathers what another man spills, right?
I'm fascinated with shiny and sparkly objects myself, it's why I prance around in my silver tiara. But that didn't cost me any money! And I don't wear any other jewlery, well, except for this bronze criss crossed bangle that I wear sometimes when I'm wurkin' it girlfriend.

 

I read most or what was said, not all of it though. My 2 cents is that the only reason LSD is illegal is the patent can't be owned by a private big pharma company. Not much money to be made...

 

Noxious gas seems to be two years late on the criminalization of LSD. But I could be wrong.