Drugs related discussion

[Scheherazade]

I would like to make a poll to see how commonly drugs/alcohol/smoking are used.

I have to admit that, apart from having alcohol occasionally, I haven't done any drugs (apart from prescribed painkillers, which has not been a regular thing either). I haven't smoked either.

Yeah, I have had a fun life ;)

So, I would like to hear your suggestions on what should be included in such a poll.

The ones I can think of:

- Alcohol (occasional)

- Alcohol (addiction)

- Cigarettes

- Soft drugs

- Hard drugs


Please feel free to discuss the issue and make any suggestions you can think of while keeping in mind that this might be a sensitive issue for many.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Alcohol moderate? Don't you think that there should be some middle ground between occasional and addicted?

I don't smoke and I certainly don't do drugs. I drink moderately, maybe slightly more than moderately, but I'm not addicted. It's been known for me to go a whole day without any beer.

[papayahed]

You might want to differentiate between hard and soft drugs.

[paradoxical]

Instead of just hard and soft drugs, I think you need to further break these down into categories. Psychedelics, opiates, amphetamines, etc. This should make for an interesting discussion.

[Scheherazade]

Would this be an acceptable differentiation?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Hard_and_soft_drugs.svg/320px-Hard_and_soft_drugs.svg.png

[ClaesGefvenberg]

This sounds like something for the Serious Discussions forum? I have a feeling that it may turn serious in no time flat.

/Claes

[paradoxical]

Would this be an acceptable differentiation?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Hard_and_soft_drugs.svg/320px-Hard_and_soft_drugs.svg.png

That looks good to me. I agree that alcohol is a hard drug. Many don't even seem to realize that it's a drug.

[LitNetIsGreat]

Alcohol above cocaine and heroin??

[Alexander III]

Would this be an acceptable differentiation?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Hard_and_soft_drugs.svg/320px-Hard_and_soft_drugs.svg.png

I think that list is very wrong, you can't have Alcohol and heroin compared to be the same, nor can you have Weed and Lsd compared to be the same, and caffeine and MDMA being similar is ridiculous.

How about this:

scale 1-10; for 3 categories -
A) Addiction level
B)Strength of High
C) Damage to body

[LitNetIsGreat]

The UK drugs classification list might come in handy.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/drugs/drug-law/

So, something like?

- Alcohol (occasional)

- Alcohol (moderate)

- Alcohol (addiction)

- Cigarettes

- Class C illegal drugs - Tranquilisers, some painkillers, Gamma, etc

- Class B illegal drugs - Amphetamines, Cannabis, etc

- Class A illegal drugs -Ecstasy, LSD, heroin, cocaine, etc

[paradoxical]

Well, we can simply classify the different types of drugs. Stimulants, depressants, hallucinogens, etc. I don't think it's a good idea to use the British or American system of Class A, B, and C or Schedule I, II, and III.

I think simply labeling the different kinds of drugs according to their effects is more objective. We can discuss the rest—which is more harmful, etc in the thread.

[qimissung]

Would the psychedelic drugs (is that term still used?) be considered "soft"? Would they more properly belong in the middle perhaps?

I have read some really interesting artlicles on several of them. They have used LSD to help cancer patients resolve their feelings about their imminent death. I don't think they are hard drugs, but they do seem to require help in their use because they can unleash powerful feelings.

[Scheherazade]

How about this:

scale 1-10; for 3 categories -
A) Addiction level
B)Strength of High
C) Damage to bodyAre you proposing to have three different polls?


The UK drugs classification list might come in handy.
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/drugs/drug-law/

So, something like?

- Alcohol (occasional)

- Alcohol (moderate)

- Alcohol (addiction)

- Cigarettes

- Class C illegal drugs - Tranquilisers, some painkillers, Gamma, etc

- Class B illegal drugs - Amphetamines, Cannabis, etc

- Class A illegal drugs -Ecstasy, LSD, heroin, cocaine, etcI like this list but maybe introduce the "occasional/moderate/addiction" classification to them as well?


I don't think it's a good idea to use the British or American system of Class A, B, and C or Schedule I, II, and III.

Why not?

Qimi> I don't know much about them either so hoping that we can come up with an agreeable list in this thread.

This sounds like something for the Serious Discussions forum? I have a feeling that it may turn serious in no time flat.

/ClaesSee the discussion over the classification above? That is why I started this one in General Chat so that more people get involved. Once we vaguely agree on a list, I will start a discussion thread with the Cat.

:D

[Lokasenna]

Perhaps smoking could be broken down as well - I haven't smoked cigarettes for a long while because they are filthy things, but a good cigar is a thing of beauty. It's also a damn-sight less damaging than a cigarette too...

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I think "Prescribed drugs" should be a category. I don't want to vote in a poll and say I do drugs if it's implied that they're done illegally, and if explicitly said so, that's usually implied.


Would this be an acceptable differentiation?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Hard_and_soft_drugs.svg/320px-Hard_and_soft_drugs.svg.png

This list just seems backwards. I don't get the criteria. LSD and mescaline in soft? Alcohol and Nocotine in hard? Caffeine and ketamine (which I've had, and it messes you up big time) in the middle? Wha?

Also, what's gamma? Are people trying to become the Hulk out there?

[stlukesguild]

I drink moderately, maybe slightly more than moderately, but I'm not addicted. It's been known for me to go a whole day without any beer.

:hand::smilielol5:

[JuniperWoolf]

Haha, wow. I can see that this is getting compicated. If it's a poll, rather than trying to classify them based on their degree of harm and addiction (because who cares, the answers are what matter), how about if we just list them?

- Alcohol (occasional)

- Alcohol (moderate)

- Alcohol (excessive)

- Tobacco, inc. cigars, chewing tobacco (occasional)

- Tobacco, inc. cigars, chewing tobacco (moderate)

- Tobacco, inc. cigars, chewing tobacco (excessive)

- Perscription Sedatives (occasional)

- Perscription Sedatives (moderate)

- Perscription Sedatives (excessive)

- Marijuana inc. oil, hashish (occasional)

- Marijuana inc. oil, hashish (moderate)

- Marijuana inc. oil, hashish (excessive)

- Cocaine (occasional)

- Cocaine (moderate)

- Cocaine (excessive)

- Salvia

- "Magic" Mushrooms

- Ecstacy

- LSD

- Opium / Laudanum

- Heroin / Morphine

- Amphetamines (Speed / Meth)

I didn't include a degree of use option with the hallucinagens or ecstacy because no one has ever wanted to use them every day; I didn't include them beside opium because no one really uses opium anymore (and especially not laudanum, this isn't 1822) so if anyone here's tried it it's probably been a once or twice thing; and I didn't include them beside heroin or meth because I've never heard of a "moderate" meth user.

Plus, you know, giving three options for every recreational drug would stretch out the poll needlessly since I doubt there even are any meth or heroin users on litnet.

I think we should axe the word "addicted," and replaced it with "excessive," because often people use drugs to excess by choice, and also there are few people who would outright claim to be "addicted." Also, that's kind of a judgement call, isn't it? If we do it simply by how often you use, it takes all judgement out of the equation which makes things more reliable. If anything, I think we should decide specifically what we mean by "occasional/moderate/excessive." Here's my take on it:

occasional = less that once/week
moderate = at least once/week but never every day
excessive = almost always every day

So what do you guys think?

:D Polls, polls, polls, are fun.

[paradoxical]

I think we should axe the word "addicted," and replaced it with "excessive," because often people use drugs to excess by choice, and also there are few people who would outright claim to be "addicted." Also, that's kind of a judgement call, isn't it? If we do it simply by how often you use, it takes all judgement out of the equation which makes things more reliable. If anything, I think we should decide specifically what we mean by "occasional/moderate/excessive." Here's my take on it:

occasional = less that once/week
moderate = at least once/week but never every day
excessive = almost always every day

I think that's a very good list, and would be sufficient. Perhaps instead of prescription sedatives, we should use the category of benzodiazepines (Xanax, Valium, Klonipin, etc.) and instead of tobacco we could use the more scientific approach and label it nicotine, the active ingredient. These are just minor details, but I do have a couple of other suggestions as well. First, I think salvia, psilocybin (mushrooms), and LSD should be combined into one category, and have mescaline (peyote) included as well. Perhaps it could be called hallucinogens or psychedelics. Ketamine should probably be included in this category since it is popular, although it is actually a dissociative.

Secondly, I think we should have an opiates category which would include codeine, hydrocodone, morphine, and heroin. Brands such as Oxycontin, Vicodin, Lortab, Fentanyl and Demerol would all fit into in this category. Even though Demerol and Fentanyl are actually narcotic analgesics, this way there would be no need to include all the different brands by name.

Lastly, I think Adderall should be included in the list of amphetamines since it is widely abused. This way, there is no need to create a separate prescription drugs category. Oh, and crack should be probably be listed along with cocaine just to be thorough. Some of the younger members may abuse various deliriants and dissociatives such as diphenhydramine and DXM, as well as inhalants. There is also a class of drugs known as research chemicals which include tryptamines such as 5-Meo-DMT and phenethylamines such as 2C-B that were very popular at one time, but you can't include everything. There's even the new synthetic cannabinoids to consider, as well as designer drugs such as mephedrone and MDPV (bath salts), but I think that's taking things to far. Users of these drugs could even select cannabis or amphetamine.

The study (and use) of drugs is a fascinating hobby, although I caution anyone thinking of going down that road. When it comes to frequency of use, I think it would be best to use the labels occasional, weekly, and daily instead of moderate and excessive. We would never be able to agree on what is considered excessive, for one thing. I also prefer the more neutral language of abuse and dependency, as used by the medical profession, however I don't have a problem with the word addiction, either.

Oh, and Scheherazade had asked why I think it's best not to use the system of Category I, II, and III. Well, I don't think it's accurate because the DEA has included marijuana and LSD in the same class as heroin and crack. Supposedly marijuana has no medical use, which is a huge issue right now. Drugs such as LSD and MDMA (ecstasy) have also been proven useful in the field of psychology. Even cocaine and amphetamines have medical use. Why can't the DEA admit that psychedelic drugs have medicinal use as well?

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

You think there're that many druggies on LitNet to take advantage of all those options?

[paradoxical]

Well, probably not.

[Delta40]

Lol. And what about a 'how honest are you' poll afterwards?

[Pensive]

I am rather touche and overly cautious when it comes to drugs. Even tend to avoid commonsheesha (or tobacco in any form) Maybe I can say I have never had any type of drugs (even tend to avoid medicinal drugs and try to cure myself by changing dietary habits in case of some illness) but I have been told I look high quite a lot of times!
I wonder where would I be if I actually start consuming drugs.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

If I didn't have this disease that has prevented me from smoking pot (the coughing would hurt my throat), I think it most likely I would've been a pot-head. It's the crowd I hung around with.

[JuniperWoolf]

Well, there are people who would do mushrooms (grows natural) who wouldn't do LSD (acid, chemicals), so I wouldn't combine them, but I do think peyote should be added beside mushrooms (because it also grows naturally and induces hallucinations). Let's throw salvia into the "grows naturally" option too, I just seperated it initially because it's legal.

I agree that "excessive" is also a judgement word. I like your suggestion of using the terms "occasional, weekly and daily." Sometimes people miss a day, so let's make it "almost always daily."

Benzo is a prescription sedatives so no need to get specific with a big long list of pharmaceutical terminology that most people don't know anyway when we can just use "perscription sedative" as an umbrella term, we really don't want to elongate the poll too much.

"Crack" is different from cocaine, they shouldn't be lumped together. Crack more addicting and is the cause of much more social harm. Specifically, poor people, people in the gutter smoke crack, whereas I know that a lot of people in my age group do coke at parties or something once/month maybe and are none the worse for wear. I wouldn't put crack on the same level as cocaine even though it's a derivative (in the same way I wouldn't put heroin on the same level as opium). No one here smokes crack, I think it's a safe bet to just axe it. I doubt anyone does heroin or meth either, but whatever, maybe we'll be surprised.

If there are any other opiates or amphetamines not listed, I think the umbrella catagories "amphetamines" and "opiates" will serve, if we were to list all of them things would become convoluted. I think it's still intersting to seperate modern opiates (heroin, morphine, ect.) from opium and laudanum, let's see if we have any classical narcotics romantics on litnet, seems the place.

Revised suggested poll options:

- Alcohol (occasional)

- Alcohol (at least once/week, not every day)

- Alcohol (almost always daily)

- Nicotine, inc. cigarettes, cigars, chewing tobacco (occasional)

- Nicotine, inc. cigarettes, cigars, chewing tobacco (at least once/week, not every day)

- Nicotine, inc. cigarettes, cigars, chewing tobacco (almost always daily)

- Perscription Sedatives (occasional)

- Perscription Sedatives (at least once/week, not every day)

- Perscription Sedatives (almost always daily)

- Marijuana inc. oil, hashish (occasional)

- Marijuana inc. oil, hashish (at least once/week, not every day)

- Marijuana inc. oil, hashish (almost always daily)

- Cocaine (occasional)

- Cocaine (at least once/week, not every day)

- Cocaine (almost always daily)

- Salvia / "Magic" Mushrooms / Peyote

- Ecstacy

- LSD

- Opium / Laudanum

- Opiates, inc. heroin, morphine

- Amphetamines inc. Speed, Meth

[Sancho]

I like a tall cool one from time to time. I’ve never done any so-called illegal drugs, largely because I’ve always had a job that subjects me to random drug testing. Also 99 times out of 100, when the doctor prescribes medication, I’ll flush it. Medical Doctors in this country are the worst drug pushers of all. I thank my mother for clueing me in to the evilness of the medical profession; growing up, we’d have to have an arm off or a sucking chest wound for her to break down and give us half a baby aspirin.

Anyway, aside from the addictiveness of a drug, there’s a dangerousness scale, or rather a ratio. It goes something like this: A is the amount of the drug that will kill you. B is the amount of the drug that will get you to a desired high. Therefore A over B tells us how dangerous a drug is. A very dangerous drug, like heroin, is only around 3 to 1. That says it doesn’t take too much more heroin to take you from high to dead. Alcohol is around 12 to 1, which is still relatively dangerous as drugs go; every year there’s going to be a couple of frat boys or who kill themselves with Jack Daniels. Marijuana comes in at around 150 to 1, meaning you’d have to smoke a truckload of the stuff to kill yourself.

Here’s the tricky part: Over time, B usually increases, but A basically stays the same. This is intuitively obvious: over time an alcoholic is going to need more and more booze to get drunk, and that will take him closer and closer to the magic number that will kill him. The same thing goes for heroin. Marijuana, however, seems to work backwards. A pothead needs less weed over time to get high.

Perhaps I should move to Humboldt County in Northern California and cozy up to one of the many glaucoma specialists there.

[smerdyakov]

Es are Es are good; he's ebenezeer good! :D

[qimissung]

lol, Sancho, that was my mother, too. As an adult I'm like "wha...? You could have given me a baby aspirin????"

[paradoxical]

I wasn't sure if we were allowed to discuss drugs at all on the forum but I had considered starting a thread on substances and the writing process. There is a long history of this, and I would be curious to know what other writers have to say. Perhaps we can discuss it when this moves to Serious Discussions or I could start a new thread later.


Es are Es are good; he's ebenezeer good! :D

Hey I remember that song! :biggrin5:

[JuniperWoolf]

Anyway, aside from the addictiveness of a drug, there’s a dangerousness scale, or rather a ratio. It goes something like this: A is the amount of the drug that will kill you. B is the amount of the drug that will get you to a desired high. Therefore A over B tells us how dangerous a drug is. A very dangerous drug, like heroin, is only around 3 to 1. That says it doesn’t take too much more heroin to take you from high to dead. Alcohol is around 12 to 1, which is still relatively dangerous as drugs go; every year there’s going to be a couple of frat boys or who kill themselves with Jack Daniels. Marijuana comes in at around 150 to 1, meaning you’d have to smoke a truckload of the stuff to kill yourself.

Wow, that's interesting. Whenever people who drink a lot find out that I get drunk after one or two drinks, their reaction ("you're lucky, I don't even feel it after a six pack anymore") always made me think that people who drink often develop a sort of physical immunity to alcohol, like it would take more than the usual amount to kill them.

[Paulclem]

I heard that alcoholics start to get drunk very quickly due to the damage their liver has sustained - not that I'm suggesting you are alcoholuic Juniper.

I was surprised by how young some are who succumb to liver disease/ damage after years of drinking.

[qimissung]

She may be small, Paul. :D It only takes me a glass of wine to get, uh, tipsy, and only a drink or two of other kinds of alcohol, also. Of course, I don't drink on a regular basis, so I don't know. But it just seems to me that different people process alcohol differently.

[Paulclem]

She may be small, Paul. :D It only takes me a glass of wine to get, uh, tipsy, and only a drink or two of other kinds of alcohol, also. Of course, I don't drink on a regular basis, so I don't know. But it just seems to me that different people process alcohol differently.

True. I don't drink much myself and feel it quickly if I have a tipple. I was grinning after a whiskey in the tea down at the allotment shed last week. Hahaaa

[JuniperWoolf]

I think I'm just not used to it. They make bartenders take a course here, you have to have this little certificate in order to be one, and apparently (according to that course), I'm not much drunker than anyone else my size, but since I'm not used to that kind of change in perception it seems more drastic to me. Useful course, that. I guess gender does make a difference in how drunk one gets because men have a lower percentage of body fat, which means they have more water in their systems and thus can tolerate more alcohol. Also, apparently the size of the person does make a difference since it's all about the volume of alcohol over water in your system, and big people obviously have more water to them.

[PoeticPassions]

I think I'm just not used to it. They make bartenders take a course here, you have to have this little certificate in order to be one, and apparently (according to that course), I'm not much drunker than anyone else my size, but since I'm not used to that kind of change in perception it seems more drastic to me. Useful course, that. I guess gender does make a difference in how drunk one gets because men have a lower percentage of body fat, which means they have more water in their systems and thus can tolerate more alcohol. Also, apparently the size of the person does make a difference since it's all about the volume of alcohol over water in your system, and big people obviously have more water to them.

Aside from one's metabolism and liver function (male metabolism's are also usually faster than female's), a lot of it actually has to do with your genes (or your biology). The most important factor in how one processes alcohol and the effects alcohol will have on a person is how much a person has of the enzyme alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH): This is the enzyme that converts alcohol to acetaldehyde through oxidation.

Asians, women, and other groups tend to have less of ADH, making them less able to metabolize alcohol, so they get drunk faster (versus people who have more of the enzyme). Also, another factor is how you experience alcohol, due to a different enzyme... some people feel sick after just a few glasses, or have awful hangovers... mainly due to the quantities of acetaldehyde in the body, which is toxic and makes you feel sick...

Anyway, that's what I can remember (on alcohol) really from the class I took in college on drugs and the psychological effects of drugs. Oh and I also remember the professor telling us that alcohol is the only drug that can kill someone during the withdrawal period... so, you can actually die from not drinking.

But yeah, Sancho, you are right about all that. The level of danger in a drug or its addictiveness is measured mainly by its overdose ratio but also by how quickly it can make you high (how quickly it enters into your bloodstream). One of the most dangerous drugs as far as overdose goes is acetaminophen (e.g. Tylenol), as the difference between the recommended does and a does that can cause permanent liver damage is not so great. Nicotine is considered as the most addictive drug.

Ok, I'll stop here because I am sure no one is interested anymore... :sleep:

[JuniperWoolf]

Oh and I also remember the professor telling us that alcohol is the only drug that can kill someone during the withdrawal period... so, you can actually die from not drinking.

Wow, I didn't even know alcohol withdrawl existed. With how many alcoholics I encounter in daily rural life, you'd think I would have at least heard of it. I bet it's like an elongated hangover.

[Paulclem]

Wow, I didn't even know alcohol withdrawl existed. With how many alcoholics I encounter in daily rural life, you'd think I would have at least heard of it. I bet it's like an elongated hangover.

I've heard it referred to as delerium tremens. I haven't heard the term for a while so i thought it had dropped out of use - but there are links to it.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001771/

[Calidore]

Aside from the occasional drink with friends, I've never been interested in drugs. I don't like the idea of my brain chemistry being altered to where I think and behave differently, or worse, where what I perceive with my senses isn't what's really there.

As far as categories, FWIW I put drugs in four: Common (nicotine, alcohol, marijuana), Opiates (Opium, heroin, cocaine), Hallucinogens (LSD), and Crazy Drugs (crystal meth, crack, PCP). Those are my purely laymanish distinctions. But there's a lot more drugs out there now than when I was a kid (I don't even know what kind ecstasy, et al are), so I'm probably way out of touch.

[Delta40]

I've seen an alcoholic in withdrawal. He was having a seizure on the steps of the flats I lived in. Somebody gave him a drink to help him recover and then he was fine. Amazing! If I get drunk, I have a seizure the next day!

[BienvenuJDC]

Just the caffeine that is found in coffee, tea, and soda, and those drinks are only taken in moderation. Maybe some ibuprofen occasionally, and percocet according to doctor's orders after I pass a kidney stone, but that is about it.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I've experienced plenty of kinds and levels of pain, but kidney stone pain is definitely not something I ever want to experience. Just the idea of it gives me shudders.

(And good to see you back, Bien.)

[JuniperWoolf]

^Yeah, I was just wondering where Bien went this morning.


...and Crazy Drugs (crystal meth, crack, PCP).

Haha, I like that classification.

It surprises me that you don't know what ecstacy is, maybe it's newish. Have you ever heard of the whole "Rave" scene (lame, glowsticks, techno music, pacifiers, neon colors, ecstacy {called "E," or "X" sometimes}, sweaty people, ect.)?

http://i414.photobucket.com/albums/pp225/pardox444/th_rave.gif (http://media.photobucket.com/image/rave/pardox444/rave.gif)


I've heard it referred to as delerium tremens. I haven't heard the term for a while so i thought it had dropped out of use - but there are links to it.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001771/

That sounds horrible. It's like what I've read about heroin withdrawal, except with hallucinations and siezures - so really, much worse than heroin withdrawal.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Your mention of techno/rave music made me think of this:

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=AyRDDOpKaLM

Which came first, the music or the drugs? It's like the chicken and the egg question, only more confounding.

[Alexander III]

I don't like the idea of my brain chemistry being altered to where I think and behave differently, or worse, where what I perceive with my senses isn't what's really there.


I take it you are also adverse to falling in love then ?

[Calidore]

It surprises me that you don't know what ecstacy is, maybe it's newish. Have you ever heard of the whole "Rave" scene (lame, glowsticks, techno music, pacifiers, neon colors, ecstacy {called "E," or "X" sometimes}, sweaty people, ect.)?


I've heard of raves--once in a while the papers would have a story about the police breaking up a rave party in a loft or rented-out club, or a kid overdosing in one.

As for ecstasy, no, I don't know if it's a hallucinogen or amphetamine-type thing or what. (That reminds me of a fifth category--do people even take uppers and downers anymore, or have they been obsoleted by newer and better stuff?)

What little rave music I've heard doesn't do much for me, either. Too much energy, not enough actual music. However, I do have to make an exception for "Speed" by a couple of local guys working as Alpha Team (20 years ago! Ack!). It's a most excellent rave-style remix of the Speed Racer cartoon theme, with sound effects and dialogue clips thrown in. It may help if you're old enough to have watched the cartoon religiously after school, as I did.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyhyPLWJDFY



I take it you are also adverse to falling in love then ?

Just a bit different.

[JuniperWoolf]

As for ecstasy, no, I don't know if it's a hallucinogen or amphetamine-type thing or what.

It's like a feel-good sensory type drug. The chemicals released are the same as those released when humans feel that sort of excited-love feeling. You overheat get dehydrated quickly though, I think people actually dry out to death sometimes, and you grind your teeth and clench your jaw which would explain the need for pacifiers.

Apparently the next day you feel the exact opposite, really depressed. I've never taken ecstasy, it's too... touchey-feely for me. Also, it's practically synonymous with raves, which is an atmosphere I'd rather be kicked in the head than experience.

[Calidore]

It's like a feel-good sensory type drug. The chemicals released are the same as those released when humans feel that sort of excited-love feeling. You overheat get dehydrated quickly though, I think people actually dry out to death sometimes, and you grind your teeth and clench your jaw which would explain the need for pacifiers.

Apparently the next day you feel the exact opposite, really depressed. I've never taken ecstasy, it's too... touchey-feely for me. Also, it's practically synonymous with raves, which is an atmosphere I'd rather be kicked in the head than experience.

Pacifiers? Good grief.

So they're going into an environment that's high-energy + crowded = hot and stuffy and taking a drug that overheats and dehydrates them more rather than, say, Gatorade. And likely adding alcohol (more dehydration) on top to boot. I can see where that would lead to medical issues.

And having to chomp on pacifiers, and depressive crashing + dehydration hangover the next day, and if someone were to ask why they do it, they'd say, "It's fun."

[Delta40]

I don't like the thought of not being in control of myself so I don't take drugs. It's enough that once in a while, for some unexplained reason I get drunk and think 'oh crap I shouldn't have done that'

[metal134]

I'll tell you something that you've probably never heard anyone say before and will never hear anyone say again, but, I've never tried drugs and I regret it. I don't mean heroin, cocaine, etc., I'm talking about psychedelic stuff like LSD, mushrooms, peyote or even marijuana. I'm 30 now with a full time job and responsibilities, thus too old to begin experimenting, so my window has really passed. Perhaps the ideals of them as mind expanding are BS, perhaps not. Thing is, I'll never know.

[Scheherazade]

So, is there a list most of us agree on?

[Shevek]

It's like a feel-good sensory type drug. The chemicals released are the same as those released when humans feel that sort of excited-love feeling. You overheat get dehydrated quickly though, I think people actually dry out to death sometimes, and you grind your teeth and clench your jaw which would explain the need for pacifiers.

Apparently the next day you feel the exact opposite, really depressed. I've never taken ecstasy, it's too... touchey-feely for me. Also, it's practically synonymous with raves, which is an atmosphere I'd rather be kicked in the head than experience.

What you're likely thinking of are the designer pills that contain impurities. This is "ecstasy," and it's safe to call it a club drug given the energizing effects of the caffeine, meth, cocaine, ketamine and other stuff that's thrown in. The pure version of ecstasy, MDMA, doesn't necessarily lead to the negative side effects you describe (except for jaw-clenching, which pretty much always happens).

I've heard of MDMA users waking up the next day feeling the opposite of what you describe -- they feel refreshed, happier and calmer. Of course, this only applies to occasional users. As for dehydration, it is generally a consequence of over-exertion on the dance floor, not the drug itself. MDMA makes users feel impervious to heat and exhaustion; in other words, raves are probably the most dangerous place to do it. Although compared to the death rates caused by other stimulants, it's relatively safe even in a rave environment.

MDMA originated with the '80s dance club scene, but it's no longer exclusively associated with dancing and raves. It is often approached like a hallucinogen, taken in comfortable environments with close friends. It has been used to treat post-traumatic stress disorder with a fairly high success rate in just a single dosage combined with psychotherapy. So long as it's taken in moderation, and it's pure (can't stress this enough), it can be safe and psychologically useful.

[Calidore]

I'll tell you something that you've probably never heard anyone say before and will never hear anyone say again, but, I've never tried drugs and I regret it. I don't mean heroin, cocaine, etc., I'm talking about psychedelic stuff like LSD, mushrooms, peyote or even marijuana. I'm 30 now with a full time job and responsibilities, thus too old to begin experimenting, so my window has really passed. Perhaps the ideals of them as mind expanding are BS, perhaps not. Thing is, I'll never know.

It may give the illusion of mind expansion (if you're lucky), but all it is is mind alteration. Bottom line, you're introducing foreign chemicals into your brain with the intent of screwing with the delicate chemical processes already taking place there. No reason to regret not doing that.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

I'll tell you something that you've probably never heard anyone say before and will never hear anyone say again, but, I've never tried drugs and I regret it. I don't mean heroin, cocaine, etc., I'm talking about psychedelic stuff like LSD, mushrooms, peyote or even marijuana. I'm 30 now with a full time job and responsibilities, thus too old to begin experimenting, so my window has really passed. Perhaps the ideals of them as mind expanding are BS, perhaps not. Thing is, I'll never know.

I am in the same boat, metal, though I'm still 25 and, at the moment, don't have many responsibilities, so the window of opportunity hasn't completely closed. :D

[JuniperWoolf]

Pacifiers? Good grief.

Haha, I thought you'd like that.


And having to chomp on pacifiers, and depressive crashing + dehydration hangover the next day, and if someone were to ask why they do it, they'd say, "It's fun."

Well, the feeling can't be overrated. You know how desperate some people are for love, well, here's a little pill that almost exactly simulates love. *shrug* I can understand the allure. My lame friend Tom likes raves, he says there's a lot of bottled water involved anyway.


As for dehydration, it is generally a consequence of over-exertion on the dance floor, not the drug itself. MDMA makes users feel impervious to heat and exhaustion; in other words, raves are probably the most dangerous place to do it. Although compared to the death rates caused by other stimulants, it's relatively safe even in a rave environment.

Ahh, interesting. So it's not that the drug is making them dehydrated, it's that they're dehydrated and the drug is preventing them from becoming aware of it.


MDMA originated with the '80s dance club scene, but it's no longer exclusively associated with dancing and raves. It is often approached like a hallucinogen, taken in comfortable environments with close friends. It has been used to treat post-traumatic stress disorder with a fairly high success rate in just a single dosage combined with psychotherapy. So long as it's taken in moderation, and it's pure (can't stress this enough), it can be safe and psychologically useful.

As long as I don't have to go to a techno dance club, and if I could just not risk becomming dehydrated and passing out and being gang-raped by neon scene kids, I would try it.


It may give the illusion of mind expansion (if you're lucky), but all it is is mind alteration.

No, it's really true that sometimes you have an experience with drugs that can change your mind forever, and I don't mean physically. You can realize things that stick with you forever, or you can see things that start to become common motifs or which carry a strong emotional association (good or bad, that's the risk) throughout your entire life, and then once you're sober you find that your way of thinking has changed forever, in big or small ways. My boyfriend tried salvia once (legal in Canada) and he'll never think about squirrels the same way ever again. Unless you've experienced that sort of thing you won't get it, in the same way you can't describe what love is to a person who's never experienced it, or you can't describe a color to someone who's color blind.

I use marijuana to root out fears (I don't smoke more than once/week, I'd have trouble studying if I did and also it would be pointless since it would stop working). I think most people carry this sort of tension, this anxiety, around with them. With marijuana, these fears bubble to the surface, you can't repress them. You can distract away from them by watching a movie or listening to music or something which is what most people do when thye're high, but I choose to aknowledge my feelings of unsettlement, unravel them. I smoke when I'm feeling anxious and I don't know what's bothering me, and then once I'm high I realize what it is that's making me anxious, then I unravel that fear, and by conciously examining my worries they become trivial. When I'm sober, I find that I'm no longer worried about it and my outlook is just a little bit clearer.

[OrphanPip]

People have to do drugs at the after-hour clubs and raves, because you can't drink at them. Imagine being sober in one of those hell holes?

[Scheherazade]

People have to do drugs at the after-hour clubs and raves, because you can't drink at them. Imagine being sober in one of those hell holes?Or you simply do not go to those "hell holes"?

;)

[Darcy88]

I smoke like a chimney - cigarettes. I am a staunch abstainer from drugs of all kind. I drink occasionally.

[Calidore]

No, it's really true that sometimes you have an experience with drugs that can change your mind forever, and I don't mean physically. You can realize things that stick with you forever, or you can see things that start to become common motifs or which carry a strong emotional association (good or bad, that's the risk) throughout your entire life, and then once you're sober you find that your way of thinking has changed forever, in big or small ways.

That's the tricky thing: The brain and mind are so complex, and are frequently unable to tell the difference between illusion and reality if the illusion is presented well enough. So if an experience with a drug changes your perception, how would you know that your new perception is true and not a permanent holdover from your altered state?


My boyfriend tried salvia once (legal in Canada) and he'll never think about squirrels the same way ever again.

Is that an example of the good or the bad? :)

I have a friend who also changed his opinion of squirrels, but he did it by cooking a few and realizing that 1) it takes several to make a decent meal and 2) the meat's not that good anyway. So his opinion changed from "possibly useful" to "completely useless."


I use marijuana to root out fears (I don't smoke more than once/week, I'd have trouble studying if I did and also it would be pointless since it would stop working). I think most people carry this sort of tension, this anxiety, around with them. With marijuana, these fears bubble to the surface, you can't repress them. You can distract away from them by watching a movie or listening to music or something which is what most people do when thye're high, but I choose to aknowledge my feelings of unsettlement, unravel them. I smoke when I'm feeling anxious and I don't know what's bothering me, and then once I'm high I realize what it is that's making me anxious, then I unravel that fear, and by conciously examining my worries they become trivial. When I'm sober, I find that I'm no longer worried about it and my outlook is just a little bit clearer.

That's probably the clearest example I've ever been given on how pot can be used in a positive fashion. I still don't like being around people who are high, though. They're not changed as such, just off somehow, like the pod people in Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

Clarification: That applies to people high on pot. One night as a teenager I was with a friend and a few of his friends at the movies, and it turned out one of them had dropped acid. That not only ruined our whole night, but was one of the scariest damn things I've ever seen. He essentially had steel shutters slammed down between all of his senses and the real world and was a slave to whatever movie was playing in his mind. Reality, however, doesn't get out of your way if you can't perceive it.

[metal134]

It may give the illusion of mind expansion (if you're lucky), but all it is is mind alteration. Bottom line, you're introducing foreign chemicals into your brain with the intent of screwing with the delicate chemical processes already taking place there. No reason to regret not doing that.
Maybe that's true and maybe it isn't. But I would prefer to have found out for myself.

[Revolte]

It's worth noting that most drugs work by bulking up on the drugs that are already in our body, dope gets you high because it's already in you and your brain knows to react to it, too much of it is too much of it. So it's not really adding foreign chemicals, because if the drug wasn't already in you it wouldn't do anything to you. Maybe kill, or make you poop a bunch, but most likely won't get you any sort of high.

[paradoxical]

Maybe that's true and maybe it isn't. But I would prefer to have found out for myself.

Well if you're 30 and have a full-time job, responsibilities, etc you can still try pot at night. It's not too late. The effects will last 4-6 hours max. Try marijuana or hashish first. You can experiment with LSD, mushrooms, ecstasy, etc. on the weekends, but I wouldn't recommend it.

It does have the ability to expand your consciousness. This is almost always a good thing, but bad trips are possible at any age. The thing is, you will probably never be quite the same, for better or worse. To me, it's worth it, but sometimes I wish I would have never tried drugs. You can't put the genie back in the bottle once you've done it.

[Darcy88]

Meditation and exercise can get you as high as most drugs.

[Alexander III]

Meditation and exercise can get you as high as most drugs.

True, but drugs are more satisfying. They satisfy one of the greatest desires in the hearts of men. What Freud labeled the Death Drive (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_drive)

Of course not all men have that desire, it depends on character.

[Sancho]

^
That’s interesting. I’ve had the thought that dependence and addiction may be an actual desire for destruction, subconscious or not. I really don’t know. But it’s been something I’ve thought of from time to time, usually when somebody I know leaves this world through misadventure.

If you had guess, what percentage of addicts do you suppose are slowly and intentionally committing suicide?

[Paulclem]

^
That’s interesting. I’ve had the thought that dependence and addiction may be an actual desire for destruction, subconscious or not. I really don’t know. But it’s been something I’ve thought of from time to time, usually when somebody I know leaves this world through misadventure.

If you had guess, what percentage of addicts do you suppose are slowly and intentionally committing suicide?

I think the same thing has been said about alcoholism - a slow suicide, though I'm not saying it's true, just interesting.

[Darcy88]

.............

[Scheherazade]

I need a list that has no more than 10 options. Can we agree on one?

[JuniperWoolf]

^Then the question would have to specify frequency. Like, "which of the following have you tried" to be really general, or "which of the following have you used in the past year," or even "which of the following do you use at least once/month." I guess it would have to be:

-tobacco
-alcohol
-marijuana
-prescription sedatives
-cocaine
-ecstasy
-natural hallucinagens (eg. mushrooms, peyote)
-synthetic hallucinogens (eg. LSD)
-opiates (eg. heroin, morphine)
-amphetamines (eg. speed)


I still don't like being around people who are high, though. They're not changed as such, just off somehow, like the pod people in Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

Haha, it sucks for the person who's high too, because they know you think there's something off about them, and that freaks them out. That's why being high around other people is terrible.

[Dina12]

I've heard it referred to as delerium tremens. I haven't heard the term for a while so i thought it had dropped out of use - but there are links to it.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0001771/

Good link, explains so much.
Anyone ever noticed how quickly alcohol resistance decreases. You spend ages building it up, think your all good for ages and you have six standard serves and youre drunk and your head's like what is this?! I don't get drunk, pfft, I must just be hungry.

[Dina12]

I think the same thing has been said about alcoholism - a slow suicide, though I'm not saying it's true, just interesting.

But you could argue that about anything, salty food, living in a city, being left handed. Practically everything we do leads to an earlier death. Are we all slowly killing ourselves by living?

[Paulclem]

But you could argue that about anything, salty food, living in a city, being left handed. Practically everything we do leads to an earlier death. Are we all slowly killing ourselves by living?

Yes, life kills you in a general sense. Except that there are some choices which hasten it more than others such as drinking. You also hear of people drinking themselves to death, but not of people salting themselves into oblivion.:D

[Revolte]

Yes, life kills you in a general sense. Except that there are some choices which hasten it more than others such as drinking. You also hear of people drinking themselves to death, but not of people salting themselves into oblivion.:D

Aside from the Slug People that is. They exist, it's the truth. I've seen 'em :arf:

I would say that excess of salty foods might have something to do with one of our number one killers, heart attacks.

Alcohol related deaths are one of the top deaths too, some times people salt their beers. That's something. I've used mexican food spices lol wasn't half bad.

[Paulclem]

Aside from the Slug People that is. They exist, it's the truth. I've seen 'em :arf:

I would say that excess of salty foods might have something to do with one of our number one killers, heart attacks.

Alcohol related deaths are one of the top deaths too, some times people salt their beers. That's something. I've used mexican food spices lol wasn't half bad.

:D
Definately - but the consumption has been hidden by producers rather than it being added to by saly users.

The number of alcohol related deaths has gone up here in the UK, and has led to minimum pricing in Scotland where the problem is greater. It's widely blamed upon the accessibility of cheap booze from Supermarkets. It's not a new problem though as gin was blamd for many social ills in the 18th century, and could be cheaply produced.

[Sancho]

:D
Definately - but the consumption has been hidden by producers rather than it being added to by saly users.

The number of alcohol related deaths has gone up here in the UK, and has led to minimum pricing in Scotland where the problem is greater. It's widely blamed upon the accessibility of cheap booze from Supermarkets. It's not a new problem though as gin was blamd for many social ills in the 18th century, and could be cheaply produced.

Yep. Found it! William Hogarth extolling the virtues of beer over that demon gin, London, circa 1751:

Gin Lane:
http://i971.photobucket.com/albums/ae197/mollyandbruno/GinLane.jpg


Beer Street
http://i971.photobucket.com/albums/ae197/mollyandbruno/BeerStreet.jpg

My drug of choice is coffee.

IlikecoffeeIdon’thaveaproblemwithitIcanhandleitbut IlikecoffeecoffeeCOFFEEyeahbabygimmesomemoreofthat wonderfulbeanjitteryjitteryjitteryJoeColombianArab icaFrenchroastItalianroastIdon’tcarejustfillupmymu gandmakeitsnappyI’minahurrythat’sagoodfellow

Coffee is good

[Paulclem]

That's the one Sancho.

I've reduced my coffee intake this year due to the effects of the strong stuff. I still drink instant though haha.

One of the bad things about drugs is of course the difficult social position it puts people in. Though they choose the route, they were often led on by people who, perhaps a bit older with a bit more experience, seem to have all the answers and the safeguards. These people are really not your friend. I've met a few charming, friendly and fun drug people who will quite happily accommodate you on their ship - whether it sinks or floats.

You can see the young addicts around any town - scruffy and unkempt with that odd and desperate air about them. The very things that will encourage a person onto a better life - a stable partner and responsibilities of some kind - are often closed. They have to do it all themselves then. Difficult.

[Delta40]

Yes, you pick up 'speed' as you go downhill...

[Calidore]

Yes, you pick up 'speed' as you go downhill...

Excellent. :hurray:

[Paulclem]

Yes, you pick up 'speed' as you go downhill...

Yes - brilliant. :lol:

[Monamy]

I've been having this thought the entire time, but...

Um, ok, I'll try to put it as simple as I can. Drinking is bad, so is drugs, smoking and all the other wacky other stuff. People who do those things actually know (and probably got sick of hearing others telling them) how bad they 'can' get if they go on. But they still go on, why?

I've gone along the latest posts about the desire of Death, but that doesn't really give me a satisfying answer. If you're so into Death, why use the slow methods? Just stick a knife in your brain, heart or eye and be done with it. You'll be meeting your sweet Death faster that way.

Ok, jokes aside (horrible ones at that,) why do we keep consuming those things? It's like we know the bad effects but find pleasure in them.

I've had this thought about the human race being rotten, but this is outrageous. =/

[Revolte]

I've been having this thought the entire time, but...

Um, ok, I'll try to put it as simple as I can. Drinking is bad, so is drugs, smoking and all the other wacky other stuff. People who do those things actually know (and probably got sick of hearing others telling them) how bad they 'can' get if they go on. But they still go on, why?

I've gone along the latest posts about the desire of Death, but that doesn't really give me a satisfying answer. If you're so into Death, why use the slow methods? Just stick a knife in your brain, heart or eye and be done with it. You'll be meeting your sweet Death faster that way.

Ok, jokes aside (horrible ones at that,) why do we keep consuming those things? It's like we know the bad effects but find pleasure in them.

I've had this thought about the human race being rotten, but this is outrageous. =/


Because addiction simply doesn't have an off switch.

Especially with harder drugs like coke. It's a nice thought, but it takes at least a year after use for an addict's natural supply of dopamine to return. Dopamine being the reason you can be happy.

Most addicts don't do drugs to get high, or to feel good. But to feel normal, and really to be normal. Because of how drugs work, it replaces the natural supply of those drugs with a third party source in which you become dependent on.

[JuniperWoolf]

I've been having this thought the entire time, but...

Um, ok, I'll try to put it as simple as I can. Drinking is bad, so is drugs, smoking and all the other wacky other stuff. People who do those things actually know (and probably got sick of hearing others telling them) how bad they 'can' get if they go on. But they still go on, why?

I've gone along the latest posts about the desire of Death, but that doesn't really give me a satisfying answer. If you're so into Death, why use the slow methods? Just stick a knife in your brain, heart or eye and be done with it. You'll be meeting your sweet Death faster that way.

Ok, jokes aside (horrible ones at that,) why do we keep consuming those things? It's like we know the bad effects but find pleasure in them.

I've had this thought about the human race being rotten, but this is outrageous. =/

You know there's a distinction between addiction and recreation, right?

[Monamy]

Because addiction simply doesn't have an off switch.

Especially with harder drugs like coke. It's a nice thought, but it takes at least a year after use for an addict's natural supply of dopamine to return. Dopamine being the reason you can be happy.

Most addicts don't do drugs to get high, or to feel good. But to feel normal, and really to be normal. Because of how drugs work, it replaces the natural supply of those drugs with a third party source in which you become dependent on.

I'm not one to talk since I never consumed any kind of drug nor drank any kind of alcoholic beverage, so I can't elaborate anything. But I've seen two different examples of people trying to quit. One example was simply successful in his first try, the other claimed the failure of his zillion time to do so. I thought maybe the other lacked the will to do it.

After reading your post, maybe I know little about addicted people and made a quick assumption.


You know there's a distinction between addiction and recreation, right?

I'm sorry, but didn't get what you mean.

[Alexander III]

I'm sorry, but didn't get what you mean.

She means, just because you sleep with a girl it does not mean you have to marry her.

[Monamy]

She means, just because you sleep with a girl it does not mean you have to marry her.

(;'_') ... u-umm... what?

[Alexander III]

(;'_') ... u-umm... what?

huh ok, let me try again, ok I see you are from Bahrain so let me try a better analogy. It is like when all those crazy americans on fox news think that just because a person is a muslim that they must a terrorist. Just as there are many ways to read and understand the Quran, the same applies to drug use. Just because one is a muslim, does not mean he is a terrorist. Only ignorant people think that. You see the point I am making here?

And the drug/religious analogy is not at all a bad one, as the mystic and spiritual natures overlap.

[tonywalt]

huh ok, let me try again, ok I see you are from Bahrain so let me try a better analogy. It is like when all those crazy americans on fox news think that just because a person is a muslim that they must a terrorist. Just as there are many ways to read and understand the Quran, the same applies to drug use. Just because one is a muslim, does not mean he is a terrorist. Only ignorant people think that. You see the point I am making here?

And the drug/religious analogy is not at all a bad one, as the mystic and spiritual natures overlap.

Good Analogy Alex

[Scheherazade]

She means, just because you sleep with a girl it does not mean you have to marry her.


huh ok, let me try again, ok I see you are from Bahrain so let me try a better analogy. It is like when all those crazy americans on fox news think that just because a person is a muslim that they must a terrorist. Just as there are many ways to read and understand the Quran, the same applies to drug use. Just because one is a muslim, does not mean he is a terrorist. Only ignorant people think that. You see the point I am making here?

And the drug/religious analogy is not at all a bad one, as the mystic and spiritual natures overlap.


Good Analogy AlexOr we can simply say that Juniper means that some people use drugs occasionally in small amounts so that they do not get addicted to them.

[Alexander III]

Or we can simply say that Juniper means that some people use drugs occasionally in small amounts so that they do not get addicted to them.

You would think most people would understand that, but in my experience when people are ignorant in a certain aspect such as on drug use, their opinions always tend to be in black and white, and it does not matter how much your try to reason with them their opinions remain black and white. So the best way is to make an analogy to a subject which they are knowlagble in and see that just as they would think that the subject they are knowlagble in is only seen by ignorant people as black or white they too might see that the subject in which they are ignorant in too may just not be as simple as black or white.

I know the world would be easier if common sense was common but, common sense only comes with experience, and unless one has had experience in a subject they will lack common sense on it.

Like me, I used to think literature was just for dull people who did not know how to live in life so they resorted to it in books. Then I read a book. And realized my previous ignorance. Sensation changes opinions not Reason.

[Scheherazade]

Or it is possible to think that their English does not let them differentiate the subtleties of languages... Rather than assuming that they are ignorant and offering analogies that might or might not work.

[Alexander III]

Or it is possible to think that their English does not let them differentiate the subtleties of languages... Rather than assuming that they are ignorant and offering analogies that might or might not work.

1) Was speaking in general, not about any specific person
2) Not an assumption, he said it himself that he has never had any experiences with drugs or alcohol.
3) Your reply to my post perfectly elucidates the uselessness of explaining things in a direct and reasonable manner.

[Scheherazade]

1) Was speaking in general, not about any specific person I think your choice of example (muslim/Quran/terrorist) because of Monamy's country of origin makes it rather personal, I'd say.

2) Not an assumption, he said it himself that he has never had any experiences with drugs or alcohol.Not having used them himself makes him "ignorant" on the subject?

3) Your reply to my post perfectly elucidates the uselessness of explaining things in a direct and reasonable manner.Is that why you opted for not explaining it in a direct and reasonable manner?

Take your time. We can wait if you are willing to make an effort in that way.

[Alexander III]

I think your choice of example (muslim/Quran/terrorist) because of Monamy's country of origin makes it rather personal, I'd say.

that was the point, to make an analogy to something that for the him/her would have been relatable.


Not having used them himself makes him "ignorant" on the subject?

As much as me not having read Steinbeck's Grapes of Wrath, make me ignorant when it comes to the book, the Grapes of Wrath. You can't really discuss a book, unless you have read it, or at least dabbled and read a few chapters.


Is that why you opted for not explaining it in a direct and reasonable manner?

Take your time. We can wait if you are willing to make an effort in that way.


*Alexander lunges with his rapier*
*Scheherazade parries and strikes back quick with the riposte*
*Alexander get caught off-guard and the blade penetrates deep*
*Scheherazade removes the blade and walks away as the physician runs over panicking and fearing for Alexander's life*
*Oh pauvre dying duellist, yours is the fate of any man who dares throw his glove at Scheherazade*

[Monamy]

Wow, half a day away, and all this tension arises. LitNet wasn't like that, what happened?

Alexander, first of all, I would thank you for explaining (at least, you did that.)

don't jump into conclusions, especially about people being ignorants. I wasn't in the slightest of ways talking about GOOD kinds of drugs or using small amounts to avoid addiction. I thought that was clear in my post but then again, I think some people tend to think that others are ignorants first before anything else.

Your examples are, to say the least, rude. So I'll refrain from entering in such discussions with you because I was part of them many times in the past 9 years or so. I'd like to avoid any conflicts, ESPECIALLY in LitNet. I'm a member of this wonderful place because it didn't house any bashing and ill-mannared people. Including direct and offending replies at one's origon, social standards and nationality.


(;'_') ... u-um... what?
^ This reply, my dear friend, was not meant to ignore you. That example you used was a bit... no, not a bit, it was totally vague for someone who was raised with the belief that marriage, sex and relationships are sacred and not to toy around with. Of course, in my nation and absolutely in my religion, you 'have' to marry the woman you sleep with, you can't just sleep with her just to satisfy your reproduction desires and then walk away. It's a big no-no in my religion. Most of our women (I say most, because a good portion of them are care-free) don't even use that kind of drug to prevent pregnancy. I apologize if that looked rude, or rubbed you in a wrong way. I really did not mean it like that.

So there, I think everyone misunderstood my previous comment about the subject, but let me put it more clearly: I was talking about the regular, harmful, in big portions, bad drugs and bad addiction. No, I was not talking about drugs used in medicine.

[JuniperWoolf]

Wow, half a day away, and all this tension arises. LitNet wasn't like that, what happened?

It improved.

[Monamy]

It improved.

:p I see!

[Alexander III]

Wow, half a day away, and all this tension arises. LitNet wasn't like that, what happened?

Alexander, first of all, I would thank you for explaining (at least, you did that.)

don't jump into conclusions, especially about people being ignorants. I wasn't in the slightest of ways talking about GOOD kinds of drugs or using small amounts to avoid addiction. I thought that was clear in my post but then again, I think some people tend to think that others are ignorants first before anything else.

Your examples are, to say the least, rude. So I'll refrain from entering in such discussions with you because I was part of them many times in the past 9 years or so. I'd like to avoid any conflicts, ESPECIALLY in LitNet. I'm a member of this wonderful place because it didn't house any bashing and ill-mannared people. Including direct and offending replies at one's origon, social standards and nationality.


^ This reply, my dear friend, was not meant to ignore you. That example you used was a bit... no, not a bit, it was totally vague for someone who was raised with the belief that marriage, sex and relationships are sacred and not to toy around with. Of course, in my nation and absolutely in my religion, you 'have' to marry the woman you sleep with, you can't just sleep with her just to satisfy your reproduction desires and then walk away. It's a big no-no in my religion. Most of our women (I say most, because a good portion of them are care-free) don't even use that kind of drug to prevent pregnancy. I apologize if that looked rude, or rubbed you in a wrong way. I really did not mean it like that.

So there, I think everyone misunderstood my previous comment about the subject, but let me put it more clearly: I was talking about the regular, harmful, in big portions, bad drugs and bad addiction. No, I was not talking about drugs used in medicine.

Sorry if I offended you.

[Monamy]

Sorry if I offended you.

Apology accepted.

I too apologize, I believe I got a bit defensive and didn't take the matter with a cool head. I'm glad we could put this behind us.

Thank you :)

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Drugs are bad, 'mkay. (http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VCDnR6Px-co)

[Scheherazade]

*Alexander lunges with his rapier*
*Scheherazade parries and strikes back quick with the riposte*
*Alexander get caught off-guard and the blade penetrates deep*
*Scheherazade removes the blade and walks away as the physician runs over panicking and fearing for Alexander's life*
*Oh pauvre dying duellist, yours is the fate of any man who dares throw his glove at Scheherazade*'Gauntlet' would have sounded better in that last line, I think.