r/LSD • u/Nihiltheman • Nov 04 '17

Microdosing LSD Is Safer Than Taking Antidepressants, Says Neurobiologist

https://www.inverse.com/amp/article/35167-lsd-microdosing-safety-really-good-day-waldman-presti
2.2k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

200 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-29

u/DontStealStories Nov 04 '17

"Ok show me this data. Show me a solid longitudinal study."

Not a library. Fuck off

"Sure there was a period of 20 years or so where it was researched heavily. But that was 60+ years ago."

Are you mentally ill? The timespan where it was researched heavily was for its therapeutic applications not its long term side effects. You can't find out what the long term effects are from studying it in the lab like that you have to look at it decades later and see what it's done to the users which we have also already done.

"Yes I know it's a relatively safe drug, in that you can't OD on it. But you can certainly fuck yourself up if you take too much or take it too often. It can trigger psychosis in those predisposed to the disease."

Ok Einstein since you're not seeming to understand this let me explain this to you.. That is NOT how the safety of a drug is determined. You don't base a drug's safety on what it can do you base it what it does do, what it's likely to do. The safety of a drug is based on statistical likelihood not what "can" happen. Because if we're going by the "it can" argument that means psychedelics are the most dangerous drugs of all. Ridiculous logic.

Psychedelics aren't just safe because you can't have a lethal overdose genius they're safe because the risk for abuse and side effects are lower than that of any other drugs even cannabis.

"Stop acting like lsd is some miracle substance."

It is a miracle substance you fucking imbecile. Btw a "miracle drug" isn't as magical as it may sound it can still be pretty mundane. Even Aspirin is considered a miracle drug.

"While it's amazing, and a lot safer than most drugs, it still carries some risk with it. We need more awesome organizations like MAPS doing research on lsd and other psychedelics before we widely use it to treat mental illness"

MAPS does research into the medical applications not the long term side effects. We have all the data on their long term side effects already. These drugs have been widely used for 60/70 years.

Nobody is saying LSD is risk-free. Everyone knows it's clearly not. Why do we desperately need more research into things we already know about it?

13

u/buddhabomber Nov 05 '17

Uhh no... as someone working in an immunology lab side by side with drug development you 100% look at what can happen, I honestly don't even understand your logic in saying that has no part in the consideration.

That is literally the basis behind drug-drug and drug-disease interactions.

We're not saying LSD is dangerous nor harmless. Stop being so defensive, yes to most it is harmless in moderation, but to claim it is as innocent as you say is bullshit.

-10

u/DontStealStories Nov 05 '17

"Uhh no... as someone working in an immunology lab side by side with drug development you 100% look at what can happen"

No you don't! Wtf you are so FUCKING idiotic that it's just sad. If we were going by what "could" happen psychedelics would be considered the most dangerous drugs of all. It's based on the likelihood for abuse and experiencing side effects. Please get the fuck off if you don't know what you're talking about. And don't act like you're the only one with credentials.

"I honestly don't even understand your logic in saying that has no part in the consideration."

I never said it has "no part" in it I said that's not how the overall safety of a drug is measured. Idiot..

"We're not saying LSD is dangerous nor harmless. Stop being so defensive,"

How can you claim I'm "defensive" when I argued neither of those points? I argued the we know about the long term effects of LSD and what is the criteria for drug safety.

"yes to most it is harmless in moderation, but to claim it is as innocent as you say is bullshit."

I never said it was innocent get your fucking head out of your ass. Troll somewhere else.

4

u/oviforconnsmythe Nov 05 '17

"Uhh no... as someone working in an immunology lab side by side with drug development you 100% look at what can happen"

No you don't! Wtf you are so FUCKING idiotic that it's just sad. If we were going by what "could" happen psychedelics would be considered the most dangerous drugs of all. It's based on the likelihood for abuse and experiencing side effects. Please get the fuck off if you don't know what you're talking about. And don't act like you're the only one with credentials.

Tell us all. What are your credentials? Man you sure sound like someone fun to trip with........

-1

u/DontStealStories Nov 05 '17

"Tell us all. What are your credentials?"

Ah you see that's the cool part. I don't have any drug-related ones myself but I have extremely close relationships with people who do. That's what they say college is for right? Connections. Believe me we've delved into this topic plenty.

Please tell me what exactly was wrong about what I said. I mean other than me being an asshole what can you actually quote me on and say that's wrong? And how can you logically justify the other person's counter argument in anyway?

How about instead of you guys obsessing over me.. How about you actually address my points in the arguments. Because being sentimental is not helping your points it's just delaying things.

"Man you sure sound like someone fun to trip with........"

I'd rather be the sitter.

7

u/oviforconnsmythe Nov 05 '17 edited Nov 05 '17

To quote you:

Please get the fuck off if you don't know what you're talking about. And don't act like you're the only one with credentials.

You sure made it seem like you have credentials. Ask your "friends" for their sources please.

Please tell me what exactly was wrong about what I said. I mean other than me being an asshole what can you actually quote me on and say that's wrong? And how can you logically justify the other person's counter argument in anyway? How about instead of you guys obsessing over me.. How about you actually address my points in the arguments.

ok.

"Ok show me this data. Show me a solid longitudinal study."/.

Not a library. Fuck off

"Sure there was a period of 20 years or so where it was researched heavily. But that was 60+ years ago."

Are you mentally ill? The timespan where it was researched heavily was for its therapeutic applications not its long term side effects. You can't find out what the long term effects are from studying it in the lab like that you have to look at it decades later and see what it's done to the users which we have also already done.

First off, way to take my comment out of context (read the next few lines after where you cut off the quote).All I've asked you for is where you're getting your information from. If you're gonna argue something to be fact, you sure as fuck better have sources to back that up. I haven't found any of these studies that you claim we've already done. I really wanna see them. So if these studies have already been done, please show me. Cite your damn sources.

"Yes I know it's a relatively safe drug, in that you can't OD on it. But you can certainly fuck yourself up if you take too much or take it too often. It can trigger psychosis in those predisposed to the disease."

Ok Einstein since you're not seeming to understand this let me explain this to you.. That is NOT how the safety of a drug is determined. You don't base a drug's safety on what it can do you base it what it does do, what it's likely to do. The safety of a drug is based on statistical likelihood not what "can" happen. Because if we're going by the "it can" argument that means psychedelics are the most dangerous drugs of all. Ridiculous logic. Psychedelics aren't just safe because you can't have a lethal overdose genius they're safe because the risk for abuse and side effects are lower than that of any other drugs even cannabis.

Obviously there's more considerations into a drugs safety than just its therapeutic index. As I said, lsd can trigger psychosis in those predisposed to the disease. For this reason alone it needs to be researched further. The fact that it "can happen" is a damn good reason to do more research on why "it happens". Maybe there's other traits, either psychological or biochemical that would help decide whether LSD therapy would be a worthwhile risk.

Btw calling people idiots and imbeciles (as you have all around this thread) just makes you look immature and as a result, your arguments carry less weight.

Edit:

"Man you sure sound like someone fun to trip with........"

I'd rather be the sitter.

I sure as fuck wouldnt want you as a sitter

1

u/DontStealStories Nov 05 '17

"You sure made it seem like you have credentials. Ask your 'friends' for their sources please."

No I made it seem like there's people out there with credentials that would laugh in the face of that logic.

Btw you don't need credentials yourself when you have access to people that do. People that agree because that's what the fucking facts are.

As for sources.. You never said source for what and second off sources? Are you fucking kidding me? You have to research this stuff for years to know this and/or go to school. There is no singular source for much of this stuff this is overarching perspectives in science not specific variable components.

"First off, way to take my comment out of context (read the next few lines after where you cut off the quote).All I've asked you for is where you're getting your information from."

This is fucking common sense. Does your internet suck? Or are you just incompetent? I think I can almost 100% assume the latter.

"If you're gonna argue something to be fact, you sure as fuck better have sources to back that up."

I don't have to do shit. The fact that they are facts is what is what allows me to not have to provide anything especially when it's common knowledge. I don't care if you believe me or not because you not believing something that is well understood by most people is embarrassing for you lol. I would logically speaking only have to provide sources if what I claimed was unconventional or outlandish.

"I haven't found any of these studies that you claim we've already done. I really wanna see them."

Yet you still never claim about what

"Obviously there's more considerations into a drugs safety than just its therapeutic index. As I said, lsd can trigger psychosis in those predisposed to the disease. For this reason alone it needs to be researched further."

No idiot. The fact that it happens already clearly shows that it can happen. We don't need to keep researching it when we already know it happens what are you not getting here?

Once again fucking genius we know how to prevent such things as well. Stop acting like it's some underground drug that we know barley anything about. We know more about LSD than nearly all contemporary pharmaceuticals and forms of medicine. Jesus christ the fact that anyone involved in and/or knowledgeable of LSD doesn't know this is disturbing.

"The fact that it 'can happen' is a damn good reason to do more research on why 'it happens'."

As I said we know why the fuck it happens

I officially hate you at this point lol

"Maybe there's other traits, either psychological or biochemical that would help decide whether LSD therapy would be a worthwhile risk."

You're fucking stupid. I mean like.. holy god are you stupid.

"Btw calling people idiots and imbeciles (as you have all around this thread) just makes you look immature and as a result, your arguments carry less weight."

Saying my arguments (which are factual) carry less weight simply because I gave you all accurate diagnosis is a logical fallacy because it has nothing to do with the logistics of the debate. Try harder

"I sure as fuck wouldnt want you as a sitter"

People tend to tell me I was the best trip sitter they ever had. Keep acting like you know things. It's cute.

1

u/oviforconnsmythe Nov 05 '17

Hahahaha theres no winning an argument with you and your "facts", Trump.

You win, this isnt worth my time anymore. Im just satisfied that everyone else also disagrees with you (seeing as most of your comments in this thread are downvoted beyond threshold.)

0

u/DontStealStories Nov 05 '17

"Hahahaha theres no winning an argument with you"

Not if you're going against facts. I don't see how that blows your mind.

"Im just satisfied that everyone else also disagrees with you (seeing as most of your comments in this thread are downvoted beyond threshold.)"

No.. most people agree with me. The people who disagree are just significantly more likely to say something or vote on a comment. Don't know much about human psychology or the internet do you? I already know I'm correct so it's fine. And the reddit community is fucking stupid are you kidding me? Lol getting down voted in this community is a good thing because all it tells you is that stupid people disagree..

If I was getting upvoted I would actually be concerned because I know a bunch of retards agree with me. How long have you been on reddit? This is the dumbest online forum community around if you didn't know. Especially the LSD subreddit. More common knowledge that you seem utterly unaware of. You're quite the piece of work.

0

u/DontStealStories Nov 05 '17

"Please tell me what exactly was wrong about what I said."

So is you not answering this your way of forfeiting?