Psychedelic drug users like to believe that gov't research is false.

Im not being closed minded here man, but listen: Many drug users believe that drug's are not as bad the anti-drug people say they are and that all of their facts are propaganda. The anti-drug people tell us the opposite side of the story, that drugs cause detrimental effects to our body and that drug users believe that drugs are relatively safe. Because I am a drug user, why should I automatically listen to the people who share my lifestyle instead of those who do not? Why should you guys have more credibility that the researchers?
I am BY NO MEANS saying that I buy everything (or anything) that the researchers say, but I also don't buy anything you guys might be saying that contradict the anti-drug researchers facts. You are both telling me things, and it's as simple as that. Just because I do drugs, doesn't mean I should believe one person and not the other. I think that most of us choose to believe that all of this research is propaganda so that we can continue our psychedelic ways. And, you know what, It COULD BE propaganda. We cant just assume that though, because of what we read on erowid and other similar sites. Unless you have done the research yourself, there is not much we can say with confidence.

Please don't become upset by this thread. Disagree, if you want, but do so respectfully. This is simply my opinion. I will not change my behavior because of what I do not know. I am just trying to be open minded toward either side.

IMHO we should research the drugs that we take from both DEA sources, etc. as well as places like erowid. We should consider both sources equally legitimate, and consider both prior to ingestion of any chemical.

 

hmm, I find that most people I talk have fairly realistic views about the drugs they're taking. Like most people know that cocaine is terrible for your heart, and I have never heard anyone try and refute that. Of course even that knowledge might not stop them, but they know the realities of what they're taking. Another example would be the fact that cigarette smokers are more aware of the harms of smoking than non-smokers. I have never found anyone who has claimed that drug use is completely harmless.

I'm sure there are a lot of controversies on specific drugs, but I'm just speaking in general terms.

 

Im actually directing this more toward psychedelic drug users, primarily MDMA.

 

I believe that MDMA has a lot of negative effects, as do some other phycadelics. I don't really get upset when anti-drug people say those things, I just think that some people try to send out pure ignorance more than others... My teacher for health class actualy said that there is a lot of propaganda, but there are some negative effects of most drugs, of course. I believe some things, but not all things that the anti-drug people say. I just don't believe that they are dirty, menaces to society (all the time) like they depict them to be.

 

I think the key is to look at the actual studies and what's proven and not what anti-drug or pro-drug people say is true.

(A long time ago I used to believe that MDMA affected your spinal fluid, but that turns out to be some kind of myth. Or, maybe it was intentional misinformation.)

I think it's possible that part of the reason that MDMA and other psychedelics have such restrictions on being studied scientifically is because some people in power believe that it would show they are not harmful at all physically in comparison with most medications, such as anti-depressants or just about any pharmaceutical you see advertised. I think people in power fear wide spread psychedelic use because it would probably cause people to take a closer look at themselves and society and people would not be as good at consuming and keeping the status quo. Power fears change because then they may not have power.

I think the misinformation about psychedelics and marijuana causes a lot of reckless illicit drug use which is harmful because when some people realize that it's misinformation about those drugs, then incorrectly make the assumption that the same must be true about cocaine, meth, oxy, or other pharmaceuticals.

You can't read in many history books that many of the great minds who invented the technology used on the internet were or are psychedelic drug users...or that Cary Grant took LSD much more than a lot of the people in the LSD forum.

 

Its all just information, no matter where it came from, sorting through it and finding what's closer to the truth is the hard part.

 

^^ That is such an excellent point. That's really what it's all about: getting the skills to sort through information and determine what is a good source and getting closer to the truth. A teacher of mine used to say that's what life is all about, seeking the truth. You might think you found it, but you never really reach the end of that road.

That's why evaluating education using standardized tests doesn't help, it hurts so much. As teachers are forced to teach students to spit out a bunch of "facts" on a test rather than work on critical thinking skills, the students get further and further away from learning to seek the truth. Some people even postulate that that's exactly what the purpose of "no children left behind" is, to reduce critical thinking and keep society from being able to evaluate the truthfulness of what they are told.

 

Yeah, man that's exactly what I was trying to get at, except I don't have your skill of concise articulation, so it took me a couple of paragraphs lol.

 

I don't believe alot of the shit that is said about MDMA, mainly the hole in your brain crap. The government actually admitted that alot of the research they conducted on the drug was bullshit. They did tests on monkeys with meth and passed it off as anti-mdma use propaganda.

There are many accurate studies on MDMA out there which refute alot of what the US government has said, namely a few german studies.

Go to dancesafe.org, they are anti-ecstasy but yet they still present the facts as they actually are.

The main problem with E is that it damages short term memory, and with constant abuse can damage serotonin levels, eventually draining you of some emotion. Otherwise, PURE MDMA is a relatively harmless and safe chemical. The real problem are the drugs that E is cut with, not the MDMA itself.

 

That's because government research usually is propaganda. Theres loads of accurate research studies that don't get used because they shine MDMA in a semi-positive light.

I know first hand how much MDMA can melt your brain. It can turn you into a driveling idiot if you take it too much.

 

What government research? Most of the medical research I've seen comes from university labs. An NIH grant doesn't make it "government," nor does DEA-approval to use a scheduled drug.

What one sees from government agencies is statistical analyses, and meta-studies - and often offical agencies are repacking work done by partisan think-tanks and advocacy groups. The Heritage Foundation is notably skilled at manipulating any data to look like it supports their point of view, and this current government is a fan of their work.

 

Yes and this forume and many others like it are part of that think tank..You there sitting in front of the computer are analizing data.. On the subject of Psycedelia...
Hospitals keep records... And this is just another source of that record keepin dATA

 

Doesn't erowid post both negative and positive effects of drugs.

most drug users these days seem to have a realistic idea about drugs, well, most mature drug users, teenagers on the other hand......any ways, most drug users understand the negative effects of drugs and what they can do to your body. Many people have seen their friends or others fall pray to drug ignorance. So neither are reliable enough until we have seen them with our own eye's. As plato said "The unexamined life is not worth living".