Then the supporting side got up, and basically said "Yeah, so, what are your feelings on booze? Is that destroying our country's youth as well? Also, prohibition didn't work the last time we tried it; things haven't changed much."
And intelligent people all over the country felt really good about themselves because their pro-legalisation views were vindicated. Then they felt shit again because nothing had changed and probably never will.
Nothing will change so long as a generation of self-hating former drug users are in power, no. Once our generation comes to power, though, we might start to see things change.
At least I hope we will. I'd hate to think we would forget the lessons of our youth so quickly.
Dude half the time I smoked I'd go out and do shit. Nothing productive, but I was out there. The only times I just sat around the entire time with friends was when it was cold, raining, snowing, or too bright out.
Smoking a bowl and going on for a walk is probably my favorite activity ever.
I think part of the sedentary habits of most stoners comes from the fact that they expect smoking to make them lazy.
That and the paranoia that kicks in for some people, I have friends that don't like being out in public when they're stoned even though you can't really tell by how they're acting.
That paranoia likely stems from the fear of getting caught being high due to its stigma and illegality. I prefer to be by myself when I'm high BUT that's probably because I'm the same way when I'm sober.
I don't get the paranoia. I was huge-paranoid all the time before I started smoking. But after getting high a couple times, I stopped. It hasn't come back, even when I go without herb for a spell. Different people, different effects.
If people want to intake something that's not going to harm others (like crack and meth will) then let 'em! I don't know I'm for weed being legalized, per se.
Curious, how does doing crack or meth cause someone to harm others? These can be very harmful substances but from my personal experience they cause the most harm to the user like all abused drugs.
Edit: just wanted to note that was mostly an observed experience. However been around a decent sample of crack/meth users to know the chance that I'd get hurt was almost non-existent.
Both drugs can cause paranoia and aggressive behavior. They're both highly addictive which can lead to the user doing extreme things to get their fix.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
If people want to intake something that's not going to harm others (like crack and meth will) then let 'em! I don't know I'm for weed being legalized, per se.
Curious, how does doing crack or meth cause someone to harm others? These can be very harmful substances but from my personal experience they cause the most harm to the user like all abused drugs.
Edit: just wanted to note that was mostly an observed experience. However been around a decent sample of crack/meth users to know the chance that I'd get hurt was almost non-existent.
Oh, I just figure that since Meth and Crack are so physically addictive that they're far more likely to cause problems at home with friends and family than something like Weed. But, you have a point that this can be true with any abuse of drugs. I didn't mean physical harm.
Dude half the time I smoked I'd go out and do shit. Nothing productive, but I was out there. The only times I just sat around the entire time with friends was when it was cold, raining, snowing, or too bright out.
Smoking a bowl and going on for a walk is probably my favorite activity ever.
I think part of the sedentary habits of most stoners comes from the fact that they expect smoking to make them lazy.
That and the paranoia that kicks in for some people, I have friends that don't like being out in public when they're stoned even though you can't really tell by how they're acting.
That paranoia likely stems from the fear of getting caught being high due to its stigma and illegality. I prefer to be by myself when I'm high BUT that's probably because I'm the same way when I'm sober.
I don't get the paranoia. I was huge-paranoid all the time before I started smoking. But after getting high a couple times, I stopped. It hasn't come back, even when I go without herb for a spell. Different people, different effects.
God, some of my stoner friends are like that. We've been smoking pot together 5-6 days a week for like six months, but they're as paranoid as ever. They'll hear sirens echoing miles away and sketch out. One time they flat out sprinted for five minutes straight because of a low-flying Cessna which they thought was a police chopper. It's so fucking irritating.
I don't get the paranoia. I was huge-paranoid all the time before I started smoking. But after getting high a couple times, I stopped. It hasn't come back, even when I go without herb for a spell. Different people, different effects.
I've noticed it in other people and I'm somewhat guilty of it as well, but that's probably because I'm slightly paranoid normally anyway. Well, not paranoid but untrusting and uncomfortable around people. One of my friends is the same way but he's really paranoid when he's not high and it's very obviously reflected in his behavior while he's high.
I'm the kind of person that when really high gets kind of zoned out. I zone out and I just think, and think, and think, and think. If I'm watching a movie or playing a game I focus on that so much that everything going on around me is almost nonexistent and this leaves me feeling vulnerable. Normally, I prefer spending my time by myself or with little amount of company as possible - that's just how I am - and that seems to be enhanced when I'm high.
Dude half the time I smoked I'd go out and do shit. Nothing productive, but I was out there. The only times I just sat around the entire time with friends was when it was cold, raining, snowing, or too bright out.
Smoking a bowl and going on for a walk is probably my favorite activity ever.
I think part of the sedentary habits of most stoners comes from the fact that they expect smoking to make them lazy.
That and the paranoia that kicks in for some people, I have friends that don't like being out in public when they're stoned even though you can't really tell by how they're acting.
That paranoia likely stems from the fear of getting caught being high due to its stigma and illegality. I prefer to be by myself when I'm high BUT that's probably because I'm the same way when I'm sober.
I don't get the paranoia. I was huge-paranoid all the time before I started smoking. But after getting high a couple times, I stopped. It hasn't come back, even when I go without herb for a spell. Different people, different effects.
God, some of my stoner friends are like that. We've been smoking pot together 5-6 days a week for like six months, but they're as paranoid as ever. They'll hear sirens echoing miles away and sketch out. One time they flat out sprinted for five minutes straight because of a low-flying Cessna which they thought was a police chopper. It's so fucking irritating.
It seems like most, if not all, of the stereotypical paranoia exhibited by stoners is related to fear of getting caught and/or arrested. Understandable when you're driving and you have weed (or other) on you because there's a real chance of getting caught. But, yeah.. freaking out over a plane or possible sirens off in the distance is pretty irritating.
I wonder that if it were decriminalized that the whole paranoia thing would cease to exist. I think it would. Well, 'cept for those kids that are doing it and are trying to hide it from their folks like cigarettes or beer, or something like that.
It seems like most, if not all, of the stereotypical paranoia exhibited by stoners is related to fear of getting caught and/or arrested.
This is true for me. I mean, obviously it is the drug, because when I'm lighting up and I'm in a field I don't care. This time it will be different. But no, 5 minutes later I'm predictably double-checking each corner of it to watch for dog-walkers. Really unfortunate. So I think it's a mix of both - weed does make you paranoid, but if it were legal the majority of reasons to be paranoid are taken away.
Paranoia is irritating but if you are gonna do that shit in public places it helps to be alert and aware.
Ive been smoking in a park with my friend, all of a sudden a car comes in the parking lot and drives around a little, then heads for the exit but at the last second turns around and parks. My friend is like "stash your weed, could be undercovers".
I mean, you could pass that off as delusional paranoia if you want. The car looking nothing like any of the undercover / unmarked police cars i've seen (although if you could tell it was a cop car that would kinda defeat the purpose of it being undercover, but a lot of them you can spot a mile away).
But yeah, he was right, two plain-clothes cops came over, searched us, didnt find shit other than the joint we were smoking. They didnt fine us or anything, just made us throw it in the garbage. My friend carefully made sure it landed on top of a magazine... soon as they left, we finished it off.
We've recently had a load of politicians over in the UK owning up to smoking pot while at university and then saying how they realised it was bad and stopped doing it. In the next breath they start talking abpout how it needs to be moved back up to a class B drug in the same category as speed.
So you tried it, realised it was 'bad' somehow and you're suitable to run a country, but I need to be locked up for a few years for the same act?
We've recently had a load of politicians over in the UK owning up to smoking pot while at university and then saying how they realised it was bad and stopped doing it. In the next breath they start talking abpout how it needs to be moved back up to a class B drug in the same category as speed.
So you tried it, realised it was 'bad' somehow and you're suitable to run a country, but I need to be locked up for a few years for the same act?
Fuckers.
Just as an aside, in your sig he says secretarian slaughter. I doubt he's talking about secretaries, so it should be sectarian slaughter. Sorry, I'm anal.
Anyway, I've only had one paranoid experience while high. I was freaked out that my parents would find out; this was back in high school. Even though I was sleeping over at my friend's house, I thought my parents would smell it on me the next day. I got so paranoid that the night was ruined.
We've recently had a load of politicians over in the UK owning up to smoking pot while at university and then saying how they realised it was bad and stopped doing it. In the next breath they start talking abpout how it needs to be moved back up to a class B drug in the same category as speed.
So you tried it, realised it was 'bad' somehow and you're suitable to run a country, but I need to be locked up for a few years for the same act?
Fuckers.
What they're trying to say is that they became 'enlightened' or 'saw the light' and realized their wickedness. Upon their epiphany, they cast down their vile ways and went on to preach and lead the way so that others do not fall down the wicked path that they once trod.
That's why they are suitable to run the country. They are fallen angels who once again have their wings. They aren't lying hypocerites at all!
We've recently had a load of politicians over in the UK owning up to smoking pot while at university and then saying how they realised it was bad and stopped doing it. In the next breath they start talking abpout how it needs to be moved back up to a class B drug in the same category as speed.
So you tried it, realised it was 'bad' somehow and you're suitable to run a country, but I need to be locked up for a few years for the same act?
Fuckers.
What they're trying to say is that they became 'enlightened' or 'saw the light' and realized their wickedness. Upon their epiphany, they cast down their vile ways and went on to preach and lead the way so that others do not fall down the wicked path that they once trod.
That's why their suitable to run the country. They are fallen angels who once again have their wings. They aren't lying hypocerites at all!
it's also known as becoming an asshole. most adults do it.
So is the notion that marijuana can have detrimental effects upon the brain, brain chemicals, or braincells all unfounded reefer madness propaganda or is it based upon fact?
So is the notion that marijuana can have detrimental effects upon the brain, brain chemicals, or braincells all unfounded reefer madness propaganda or is it based upon fact?
If smoked heavily in youth, in those with a history of mental illness within the family it increases the chance of the onset of various mental diseases such as schizophrenia.
So is the notion that marijuana can have detrimental effects upon the brain, brain chemicals, or braincells all unfounded reefer madness propaganda or is it based upon fact?
Everything you ingest has effects on those. THC binds to certain receptors in your brain the same way that other substances do. It might inhibit certain functions of your brain and uh, opposite of inhibit other functions. Nothing is permanent though.
Because I remember back when I was in school (probably middle school a decade ago) they were teaching us that marijuana kills brain cells and was the number one reason not to do it, as those cells don't grow back.
Just goes to show you can't really believe many things they teach you in school.
It's complicated.
Because on the one hand, it's only been relatively recent (and astonishing) research that has overturned the old scientific understanding that brain cells don't grow back.
So they can't really be blamed for teaching you that aspect.
But on the other hand, they basically lied to your face when they said marijuana kills them, so in a way we can definitely blame them.
Yeah, it's pretty much a given that they're going to feed you bullshit lies and propaganda in order to get you to conform like a good little boy or girl.
Merovingi on
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
0
TL DRNot at all confident in his reflexive opinions of thingsRegistered Userregular
edited July 2007
You can pretty much discount as vile and odious propaganda everything you were programmed with in school. Especially re: drugs, history, and sex ed.
Here are some gems from the loverly Ohio education system.
1)there is no such thing as anal sex
2)drugs = BAD! why? cause they're DRUGS, and drugs are BAD! instant addiction and retardation, and your kids will have unusual appendages, assuming your withered penis can function long enough to impregnate the thai hooker you're smoking crack with
3)ALL condoms contain millions of holes, each large enough to fit millions of HIV viruses
4)Colombus and his brown friends lived happily ever after.
When they don't out and out lie, they'll just leave out whatever isn't convenient. I don't remember hearing about any wars except Revolutionary, 1812, Civil, and WW1&2. Vietnam? Pfft, can't have that. These hooligans might draw a parallel.
TL DR on
0
HacksawJ. Duggan Esq.Wrestler at LawRegistered Userregular
First off, I just got to this thread. I skipped the previous 12 pages because I'm a lazy bastard and I've already formulated my opinions on this issue, so please forgive me if I repeat anything or bring up an argument that's already been settled.
So, here goes:
Drugs are not the problem. People are. People decide to do drugs in the first place; no one forces them. If a young man decides to do heroin, or cocaine, or crack, etc., he should accept personal responsibility for the initial act as well as the subsequent addiction he may develop. Addiction is a disease, not a moral issue, and it should be treated as such. Treatment for drug addiction is the only way to stem the problem at its source: even if you remove the supply side of the equation, the demand of the addict is still there. If I want my fix, removing Dealer A will simply force me to go to Dealer B, possibly at a higher cost, and do little more than piss me off about having to drive/walk/bike X amount of miles more to get my drug.
The War on Drugs is a laughable attempt by the government to put a stern face and imposed moral dogma on an issue that requires neither. Help is the answer, not force.
Gravity and Punishment on
"I assure you, your distaste only reveals your ignorance."
0
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
edited July 2007
yeah that's pretty much what the last 12 pages have been about.
Just goes to show you can't really believe many things they teach you in school.
It's complicated.
Because on the one hand, it's only been relatively recent (and astonishing) research that has overturned the old scientific understanding that brain cells don't grow back.
So they can't really be blamed for teaching you that aspect.
But on the other hand, they basically lied to your face when they said marijuana kills them, so in a way we can definitely blame them.
There's "grow back" in terms of a partially-damaged cell repairing itself, which we've known about for years, and then there's "grow back" in terms of new cells being generated to replace dead ones, which we've only fairly recently discovered (early 90s IIRC) and isn't very well-understood.
Either way, destroying brain cells is not something you want to fuck around with if you can help it, but AFAIK there's no reason to believe that marijuana actually kills brain cells. (There's some evidence that cannabinoid receptors have a protective role, but that's not well-understood, either.)
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
JohnnyCacheStarting DefensePlace at the tableRegistered Userregular
edited July 2007
so I've basically come to the conclusion that when they talk about "adrenachrome" in fear and loathing, they are talking about DVT.
Adrenochrome is a real drug, but it's not nearly as powerful as portrayed in Fear and Loathing. It could have just been exaggeration for its own sake, or they could have been talking about 2CT7, PCP, or any number of other powerful dissociative psychedelics.
And what's DVT? I've never seen that acronym.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
0
JohnnyCacheStarting DefensePlace at the tableRegistered Userregular
DMT wouldn't induce the kind of external action seen. People who do DMT don't get up and run around, they usually stay sitting or lying down during the course of the experience.
That said, that is a generalization, and if you have any conflicting accounts I'd love to hear them.
Feral on
every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
Just goes to show you can't really believe many things they teach you in school.
It's complicated.
Because on the one hand, it's only been relatively recent (and astonishing) research that has overturned the old scientific understanding that brain cells don't grow back.
So they can't really be blamed for teaching you that aspect.
But on the other hand, they basically lied to your face when they said marijuana kills them, so in a way we can definitely blame them.
There's "grow back" in terms of a partially-damaged cell repairing itself, which we've known about for years, and then there's "grow back" in terms of new cells being generated to replace dead ones, which we've only fairly recently discovered (early 90s IIRC) and isn't very well-understood.
Either way, destroying brain cells is not something you want to fuck around with if you can help it, but AFAIK there's no reason to believe that marijuana actually kills brain cells. (There's some evidence that cannabinoid receptors have a protective role, but that's not well-understood, either.)
How many brain-cells you kill smoking pot depends upon how long you hold in the hit. If you hold it in for five seconds, for example, it will kill as many brain cells as you would kill by holding your breath for five seconds.
Here is my hypothesis on drug paranoia, particular in regards to the kind invoked by the presence of other people:
Our minds are very adept at "reading minds" of the people around us, i.e. inferring about others' emotions and mental states. This is done through bottom-up cues (facial expressions, gestures, tones of voice, etc.) and top-down cues (our past experiences with people in similar situations, how we logically think someone would think or feel in a certain situation). Under the influence of a drug, particularly one with strong cognitive and visual distortions, our ability to percieve these cues is in turn also distorted. This creates an anxiety about what another person is actually thinking/feeling/saying. For example, I had an experience once while on 2C-B where I was constantly confused/paranoid by the people around me because everything they said sounded like an innuendo. I finally realized that my mind reading abilities were hampered when I watched someone reach for a cup. I thought to myself, "Why are they doing that?" Naturally, I watched them bring it to their lips and start to drink, and that was when I realized what they were trying to do. That moment of uncertanity came from my reduced capacity for inferring about what this person was actually thinking, and this reduced capacity had been causing me anxiety and paranoia.
Obviously, there are some types of paranoia that would not fit under this. But our ability to read minds is deeply ingrained and very automatic, and even when that ability is distorted our minds cannot help but try anyway.
Just goes to show you can't really believe many things they teach you in school.
It's complicated.
Because on the one hand, it's only been relatively recent (and astonishing) research that has overturned the old scientific understanding that brain cells don't grow back.
So they can't really be blamed for teaching you that aspect.
But on the other hand, they basically lied to your face when they said marijuana kills them, so in a way we can definitely blame them.
There's "grow back" in terms of a partially-damaged cell repairing itself, which we've known about for years, and then there's "grow back" in terms of new cells being generated to replace dead ones, which we've only fairly recently discovered (early 90s IIRC) and isn't very well-understood.
Either way, destroying brain cells is not something you want to fuck around with if you can help it, but AFAIK there's no reason to believe that marijuana actually kills brain cells. (There's some evidence that cannabinoid receptors have a protective role, but that's not well-understood, either.)
How many brain-cells you kill smoking pot depends upon how long you hold in the hit. If you hold it in for five seconds, for example, it will kill as many brain cells as you would kill by holding your breath for five seconds.
Well any smoke of a carbon based substance will contain a small amount of carbon monoxide which kills brain cells
So I picked up some salvia, 40x, at a convenience store. Smoked with a butane lighter, got a buzz but no trips. Gonna try it again sometime...I hear it's always a dice roll.
What I have to bring up is the free sample I got in one of the packs (there were three of us). It's a little baggie with some powdered plant that smells like a spice...labeled,"Island Smog 10x 330mg; Premium Herb Blend; Free Sample." Google can't tell me anything...anyone have any ideas before I, genius that I am, just go ahead and smoke it?
Torso Boy on
0
VariableMouth CongressStroke Me Lady FameRegistered Userregular
so I've basically come to the conclusion that when they talk about "adrenachrome" in fear and loathing, they are talking about DVT.
Anyone like my theory?
in the commentary the producer makes it sound like it was an entirely madup substance... so my guess is while it may exist, at the time of the writing it was so unobtainable as to have been basically a joke, or a hunterism, or whatever you want to call it.
Posts
At least I hope we will. I'd hate to think we would forget the lessons of our youth so quickly.
I don't get the paranoia. I was huge-paranoid all the time before I started smoking. But after getting high a couple times, I stopped. It hasn't come back, even when I go without herb for a spell. Different people, different effects.
So do I, but surely most politicians around today were teenagers during the summer of love?
I think that will depend on whether or not our generation becomes -responsible- in its drug use.
If they do the same stupid things their parents did, they'll likely have the same reaction.
I mean, look at any kind of social revolution, like in art.
Every generation tries to break free of the last generation, and, when they're in power, they do everything they can to constrain the next.
Both drugs can cause paranoia and aggressive behavior. They're both highly addictive which can lead to the user doing extreme things to get their fix.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Oh, I just figure that since Meth and Crack are so physically addictive that they're far more likely to cause problems at home with friends and family than something like Weed. But, you have a point that this can be true with any abuse of drugs. I didn't mean physical harm.
I'm the kind of person that when really high gets kind of zoned out. I zone out and I just think, and think, and think, and think. If I'm watching a movie or playing a game I focus on that so much that everything going on around me is almost nonexistent and this leaves me feeling vulnerable. Normally, I prefer spending my time by myself or with little amount of company as possible - that's just how I am - and that seems to be enhanced when I'm high.
It seems like most, if not all, of the stereotypical paranoia exhibited by stoners is related to fear of getting caught and/or arrested. Understandable when you're driving and you have weed (or other) on you because there's a real chance of getting caught. But, yeah.. freaking out over a plane or possible sirens off in the distance is pretty irritating.
I wonder that if it were decriminalized that the whole paranoia thing would cease to exist. I think it would. Well, 'cept for those kids that are doing it and are trying to hide it from their folks like cigarettes or beer, or something like that.
This is true for me. I mean, obviously it is the drug, because when I'm lighting up and I'm in a field I don't care. This time it will be different. But no, 5 minutes later I'm predictably double-checking each corner of it to watch for dog-walkers. Really unfortunate. So I think it's a mix of both - weed does make you paranoid, but if it were legal the majority of reasons to be paranoid are taken away.
Ive been smoking in a park with my friend, all of a sudden a car comes in the parking lot and drives around a little, then heads for the exit but at the last second turns around and parks. My friend is like "stash your weed, could be undercovers".
I mean, you could pass that off as delusional paranoia if you want. The car looking nothing like any of the undercover / unmarked police cars i've seen (although if you could tell it was a cop car that would kinda defeat the purpose of it being undercover, but a lot of them you can spot a mile away).
But yeah, he was right, two plain-clothes cops came over, searched us, didnt find shit other than the joint we were smoking. They didnt fine us or anything, just made us throw it in the garbage. My friend carefully made sure it landed on top of a magazine... soon as they left, we finished it off.
So you tried it, realised it was 'bad' somehow and you're suitable to run a country, but I need to be locked up for a few years for the same act?
Fuckers.
Just as an aside, in your sig he says secretarian slaughter. I doubt he's talking about secretaries, so it should be sectarian slaughter. Sorry, I'm anal.
Anyway, I've only had one paranoid experience while high. I was freaked out that my parents would find out; this was back in high school. Even though I was sleeping over at my friend's house, I thought my parents would smell it on me the next day. I got so paranoid that the night was ruined.
Only happened once, though.
What they're trying to say is that they became 'enlightened' or 'saw the light' and realized their wickedness. Upon their epiphany, they cast down their vile ways and went on to preach and lead the way so that others do not fall down the wicked path that they once trod.
That's why they are suitable to run the country. They are fallen angels who once again have their wings. They aren't lying hypocerites at all!
it's also known as becoming an asshole. most adults do it.
If smoked heavily in youth, in those with a history of mental illness within the family it increases the chance of the onset of various mental diseases such as schizophrenia.
Then they go to college campuses and tell women that they are lesbians because they wear pants and so are going to hell.
It's complicated.
Because on the one hand, it's only been relatively recent (and astonishing) research that has overturned the old scientific understanding that brain cells don't grow back.
So they can't really be blamed for teaching you that aspect.
But on the other hand, they basically lied to your face when they said marijuana kills them, so in a way we can definitely blame them.
Here are some gems from the loverly Ohio education system.
1)there is no such thing as anal sex
2)drugs = BAD! why? cause they're DRUGS, and drugs are BAD! instant addiction and retardation, and your kids will have unusual appendages, assuming your withered penis can function long enough to impregnate the thai hooker you're smoking crack with
3)ALL condoms contain millions of holes, each large enough to fit millions of HIV viruses
4)Colombus and his brown friends lived happily ever after.
When they don't out and out lie, they'll just leave out whatever isn't convenient. I don't remember hearing about any wars except Revolutionary, 1812, Civil, and WW1&2. Vietnam? Pfft, can't have that. These hooligans might draw a parallel.
So, here goes:
Drugs are not the problem. People are. People decide to do drugs in the first place; no one forces them. If a young man decides to do heroin, or cocaine, or crack, etc., he should accept personal responsibility for the initial act as well as the subsequent addiction he may develop. Addiction is a disease, not a moral issue, and it should be treated as such. Treatment for drug addiction is the only way to stem the problem at its source: even if you remove the supply side of the equation, the demand of the addict is still there. If I want my fix, removing Dealer A will simply force me to go to Dealer B, possibly at a higher cost, and do little more than piss me off about having to drive/walk/bike X amount of miles more to get my drug.
The War on Drugs is a laughable attempt by the government to put a stern face and imposed moral dogma on an issue that requires neither. Help is the answer, not force.
edit: I keed, I keed
There's "grow back" in terms of a partially-damaged cell repairing itself, which we've known about for years, and then there's "grow back" in terms of new cells being generated to replace dead ones, which we've only fairly recently discovered (early 90s IIRC) and isn't very well-understood.
Either way, destroying brain cells is not something you want to fuck around with if you can help it, but AFAIK there's no reason to believe that marijuana actually kills brain cells. (There's some evidence that cannabinoid receptors have a protective role, but that's not well-understood, either.)
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
Anyone like my theory?
I host a podcast about movies.
And what's DVT? I've never seen that acronym.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
What I meant to type was DMT
I host a podcast about movies.
That said, that is a generalization, and if you have any conflicting accounts I'd love to hear them.
the "no true scotch man" fallacy.
How many brain-cells you kill smoking pot depends upon how long you hold in the hit. If you hold it in for five seconds, for example, it will kill as many brain cells as you would kill by holding your breath for five seconds.
Our minds are very adept at "reading minds" of the people around us, i.e. inferring about others' emotions and mental states. This is done through bottom-up cues (facial expressions, gestures, tones of voice, etc.) and top-down cues (our past experiences with people in similar situations, how we logically think someone would think or feel in a certain situation). Under the influence of a drug, particularly one with strong cognitive and visual distortions, our ability to percieve these cues is in turn also distorted. This creates an anxiety about what another person is actually thinking/feeling/saying. For example, I had an experience once while on 2C-B where I was constantly confused/paranoid by the people around me because everything they said sounded like an innuendo. I finally realized that my mind reading abilities were hampered when I watched someone reach for a cup. I thought to myself, "Why are they doing that?" Naturally, I watched them bring it to their lips and start to drink, and that was when I realized what they were trying to do. That moment of uncertanity came from my reduced capacity for inferring about what this person was actually thinking, and this reduced capacity had been causing me anxiety and paranoia.
Obviously, there are some types of paranoia that would not fit under this. But our ability to read minds is deeply ingrained and very automatic, and even when that ability is distorted our minds cannot help but try anyway.
Well any smoke of a carbon based substance will contain a small amount of carbon monoxide which kills brain cells
Next Week: BBQs the silent killer!
What I have to bring up is the free sample I got in one of the packs (there were three of us). It's a little baggie with some powdered plant that smells like a spice...labeled,"Island Smog 10x 330mg; Premium Herb Blend; Free Sample." Google can't tell me anything...anyone have any ideas before I, genius that I am, just go ahead and smoke it?
in the commentary the producer makes it sound like it was an entirely madup substance... so my guess is while it may exist, at the time of the writing it was so unobtainable as to have been basically a joke, or a hunterism, or whatever you want to call it.
I still would kill to do some.