Talk:Drugs:Fact and Fiction/Archive 1

Only Recreational?

 * We definitely need more information on prohibited drugs, because what little info most people have is propaganda. However, is this book only concerned with recreational usage? What about spiritual, entheogenic usage? (Substances that are difficult, or impossible to use recreationally, such as salvia and DMT.) I think this is at least as important as the recreationally-used drugs. PurplePieman (talk) 22:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Please don't delete parts of this book, its not something that can be written in 10 minutes, give it some time to be filled out more. --Floydian 16:31, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Appeal for personal experiences
I deleted the paragraph at the beginning that requested personal testimonials about drug experiences. Wikibooks is not for original research, which this sort of appeal violates and as such we can't have it here. If it is put back in, this may be grounds to delete this whole Wikibook. Such testimonials will be deleted from other parts of this Wikibook under this standard as well. If you want to discuss drug experiences between different drug users, please try Wikicities, or start your own web server for that sort of content.

I have defended the idea that this book could exist, and make sure that it becomes something worthy of a pre-med college textbook, not a drug user's handbook worthy of the uncyclopedia. --Rob Horning 07:46, 8 February 2006 (UTC)


 * BTW, to add here, if you want to point to testimonials and other such stuff that has been put onto other websites as a reference and cite it here, that would be another issue altogether. Legitimate scholarly research is acceptable, where you are citing other publications to prove a factual point.  We also don't want to be seen as encouraging people to partake of these very harmful substances.  --Rob Horning 03:31, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I don't think you guys get the point of this book
Its not a book about drugs, straight up and out. Its a book that someone who is looking to try drugs should read so they DON'T end up killing themselves, but at the same time don't get discouraged by obvious lies that are published about them.

Fact of the matter is, unless you have tried drugs, you are trapped on the outside of a wealth of knowledge and an alternative view of our reality. You see someones quest for inner peace and knowledge as "A druggie looking to get high".

The appeal for people to post experiences is there for people who have already had those experiences to describe them. Somebody who has experienced a drug has far more factual points on a drug than a medical journal that has conducted tests on rats or monkeys. Someone who has done ecstacy for 20 years can tell you how amzingly safe MDMA itself is. Someone who has tripped on acid since the 60's can tell you that acid is comparible to marijuana in safety. Someone who has snorted cocaine hundreds of times can tell you how a little self control is all it takes to avoid an addiction, and that you can surely feel it getting out of hand well before you have a heart attack.

Can medical journals that have studied rats tell you this? Can rats describe their symptoms of the euphoria? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.117.98.223 (talk • contribs).


 * No, but you are practicing amateur pharmacology when you participate in the consumption of controlled substances without any sort of scientific methodology or even throw caution to the wind and willy nilly partake of random substances. Please, if you want to add content here, please look at WB:NPOV and find citable material which can be used to define what exactly happens when you consume these drugs.


 * As for consuming mind altering drugs... I can say that yes, I have. In every case under the supervision of a licensed medical practitioner.  I won't go into further details, and it was for specific medical procedures that would stand up to state medical board review.  I can't say that about what is advocated in this page.  --Rob Horning 22:59, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Just as always and (nearly) everywhere
as i found this book i wondered how it could be that wikipedia, that is very often influenced by the current public opinion, has things like that on their list. i read and after a while i noticed the link that brought me here. i can just say that it is so sad and it really hurts me reading your argumentation. i cant speak in my own words without getting rude, because i got so frustrated over the years caused by people being mad about stuff about drugs they have read in a magazine. so i want to say it through 3 sayings:

1) If you have no concept of it at all: Just sh*t up from time to time! (german, dunno who; not meant discourteously)

2) Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. (Benjamin Franklin)

and after searching for half an hour for a exact translation i thought about the third "why should i try to talk to those that wont listen anyway?", so if you want to understand the last you will have to translate it yourself and proof me that you're listening.

3) Der Durchschnittsmensch gleicht einem eingepferchtem Tier, das noch nie bis zum Gatter vorgedrungen ist und daher völlig verständnislos die Berichte seiner Leidensgenossen hört, die von Begrenzung und Gefangennahme sprechen. Weil er noch nie weit genug gegangen ist, weiß er nicht, dass er im Käfig sitzt. (Baba Ram Dass)

a few words to me: early 20s, lot of experience with thc, specially after i nearly stopped touching ethanol when i was around 15/16 (3-4 times alcohol/year now); german (sorry for the spelling and grammar mistakes btw!). in my mind there are people who shouldn't take drugs or substances that could be seen as such, because they have latent mental problems or the natural tendency to get problems when getting in contact with drugs in common. The others wont need drugs to survive, too, yes, but this group simply splits into the ones who cannot talk about the topic and the ones who can. Sorry that this sounds so arrogant, but i am not able to say it in other words. i could write an essay here why the ones, who had no long term drug consumption or at least to people who get to manage to take drugs without messing everything up, can, but this isnt the place for such things. in short: every single, adult person having drug problems has no right to complain, because it is his/her own fault. and according to 3) nobody who has no drug experience should tell a one who has, what to do, say or think. if you would research a little bit, you will find out that Baba is some kind of mental leader of some weird club, but thats exactly what i want to say: Only because we have no idea what anyone is talking about we dont have the right to judge.

i understand that wiki... are public and have to hold up the law, thats ok and thats right. but in every other point where the law isnt broken every open minded person should let the others have as much freedom as possible. i dont get it in my head whats the problem with that idea... u dont have to read this book. If one person reads the section about life changing experiences and so on and thinks by itself "thats a step to far for me" and decides to take something less dangerous (i know how misplaced this word is, but you know what i mean: less risk) or nothing at all then you should be happy that this book exists. and the ones that would still want to try wont be held up by law or anything else if not by their own will, believe me. this is also the reason why im quiet shocked since i saw this site, because i thought wikipedia would be such a place of such people, where everyone does as he wants as long as nobody is hurt and when you show me the person that is hurt and didnt had the possibility to say no, then i might think about to argue seriously about that topic again.

at the end a saying about the third common usage of drugs despite fun and spiritual stuff, refers to alcohol but is true for all other drugs i think:

alcohol is a bridge, but no path (i know what ur thinking :-))

greetings       LaVey

Erroneous
Much of the information in this article is true. However, much is erroneous, and even more is left out, painting a rather unclear picture of the effects that drugs have on the body. While I find many of the points to be valid, it hardly seems like a full "fact and fiction"