This is what I'm doing tonight

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

Regardless, I'm done teaching. Perhaps some of you will enter the medical field at some point and see/understand what I'm speaking of instead of your clouded judgement and ideals of the truth.

You haven't done any "teaching". You've jumped in the topic screaming, "Drugs are bad, mmkay!" and called us all stupid. I've done a lot of research on different drugs, and their effects on brain chemistry(as well as their effects on various systems in the body, but those effects are almost all short-term, usually when you're on the drug itself), and I've done a few different drugs. I've seen what different drugs do to people's lives, and what harmful effects come from long term drug use for different drugs.

I've come to the conclusion that most of the drugs condemned by the nation aren't condemned by the world. In fact, there are some places where certain drug use is seen as holy, spiritual. Speeding up someone's digestive system doesn't necessarily mean harm. Slowing down or speeding up someone's heart rate doesn't necessarily mean harm. Feeling happy while you're on the drug then immediately feeling sad afterward doesn't necessarily mean harm. You have to understand serotonin, dopamine, etc., and their receptors, and which drugs bind to which receptors. You have to understand the different drugs' half lives, and understand which part of the body they are stored.

It's funny that you say once people go into the medical field, they start to understand what you're speaking of(you haven't actually spoke of anything, actually. Paraphrasing, but nonetheless, "My wife and I know things. I've seen things. You're stupid."). I've read a ton of different studies by different people with Ph.D's and M.D's in different things ranging from Biology to Psychology; Chemistry to Neurosciences; Biochemistry to Mollecular Physiology. I've seen different tables and formulas explaining different effects of different drugs on the brain and on a person's mind. These are all real professionals, in real fields, with real studies, with real volunteers and participants. Tell us about these tests you've seen. Show us how every drug that you don't need is harmful. If you really think you understand what's going on, explain. If not, keep telling us that we're wrong while you're right while not proving anything.

Regarding your earlier posts, just stating that "any drug or chemical that you don't NEED is harmful to your body" is completely ignorant and ironic, it's almost incomprehensible. Are you aware of every single hormone and receptor in the brain? Are you aware of every single chemical's purpose in the brain? Do you understand the purpose of the pineal gland? If you do, I'd be quite surprised as even experts in medicine and other sciences don't know what the purpose is. They don't know the reason for dreams, or their effects on our minds. That's one of the reasons you're already wrong.

Another reason you're wrong is that you want to start arguing semantics. There is a dictionary definition of drug. Drugs are substances that react physiologically. Do you know how many drugs there are? Do you how many drugs we classify as "safe"? The fact(not some clouded misconception, by the way) remains that while drugs effect the body, they aren't all necessarily safe or dangerous. Certain chemicals have negative effects on the body. Chemicals containing arsenic are obviously an example of the negative effects on the body. Caffeine is a stimulant much like amphetamines, but it's legal. It's considered safe by most. Acetaminophen is considered safe by most. Unfortunately, even following recommended doses of Tylenol can ruin your liver. That doesn't seem very safe, now does it?

The third, most definitely not last, but the last I'm willing to discuss, reason you're wrong is that you don't even know what chemical or drug I'm talking about. You don't know all of the research that's been done on the specific chemical/drug I'm talking about. You have no idea on dosage or anything more complex than "it's a drug."

If you want to go into a deeper discussion of brain chemistry and hormones and different drugs' effects on different hormone receptors, come at me bro. I've actually done research. Reading text books and listening to professors isn't research.

I haven't done cocaine, or heroin, or ecstasy. I've done MDMA, though. I've done LSD. I've smoked plenty of weed. I've also done different research chemicals. I've taken magic mushrooms, and I've used alcohol(although I don't necessarily care for it). I've taken hydrocodone with acetaminophen, codeine, and different benzodiazepines. I've taken different doses of each, and used them for different lengths of time. I'm not saying it's necessarily research, but I have used a blood pressure monitor while experiencing some of them. I'm not stupid, I have no clouded judgment, and I don't pay attention to misconceptions. I pay attention to ignorant, pre-conceived notions. I pay attention to effects, results, and studies.

 

[pro-rabbit 5,000+ posts]

You are simply a funny man. That adjust facts and ideas of other countries to suite your view point. I promise I have been arising this far linger then you have. And yes to an extent you are right about some affects of drugs, however life long studies are still being conducted and a large amount of new reports each year from those studies, please keep up with as they are very real studies and a wealth of knowledge.

I will never condone the use of any drug for recreational use and many drugs for medical I actualy do not condone as the side effects are far worse then the original issue. However, to think I'm stupid for having a larger grasp on the issue from another perspective is ludacris at best. If you wish, I can have the wife post up with various facts from several research projects she has been a part of. I'm sure even though she is bound by contracts there are still some things in which she can discuss openly. If not, then when the information is pusblished I will be sure to het you a copy all though since it will not side with ideology you will attempt to discredit the findings by stating what ever you can muster from other intrusted sources.

On a side note, I find it comical to which you and others attempt to take these concerstations. If you new about the research in which talk about then why not disclose the rest of the information in which 99% say long term affects are unknown at this time mainly do to the short cycle of the test. In reality each person is affected differently be all chemicals and drugs and all the tests in the world will not show with 100% accuracy what the resultant may be. However thinking for one minute that there are more positive results then negative is laughable. Please shoe me athentic legal studies with accepted results of where "no negatives" or "limited negative" results are found.

However, no since in dragging this out as it is. I have no further reason to discuss this further as obviously this is just a debate of ideas rather then facts it would seem.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

Holy crap, I didn't know the thread would turn into this. That might be the longest post I have ever seen.

 

[TheUnderFighter 10+ year member]

See what you've started bro?

Buck was just looking to get a little good and drunk... and now we're in pharmacology debates.

How bout them Yankees? **** em.

 

[thevic24 5,000+ posts]

I suddenly feel the urge to get high now...

 

[IonRL205 10+ year member]

See what you've started bro?Buck was just looking to get a little good and drunk... and now we're in pharmacology debates.

How bout them Yankees? **** em.

That's the thunderdome for ya. My thread about my dumb manager turned into a debate about clinton ruining the country lol

 

[pro-rabbit 5,000+ posts]

That's the thunderdome for ya. My thread about my dumb manager turned into a debate about clinton ruining the country lol

I still say it was failing long before his "leadership".

 

[IonRL205 10+ year member]

I honestly have no idea about anything that clinton did lol, i've never paid attention to politics or the news.

Actually I think it was because I was too young to care at the time.

 

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

You are simply a funny man. That adjust facts and ideas of other countries to suite your view point. I promise I have been arising this far linger then you have. And yes to an extent you are right about some affects of drugs, however life long studies are still being conducted and a large amount of new reports each year from those studies, please keep up with as they are very real studies and a wealth of knowledge.
I will never condone the use of any drug for recreational use and many drugs for medical I actualy do not condone as the side effects are far worse then the original issue. However, to think I'm stupid for having a larger grasp on the issue from another perspective is ludacris at best. If you wish, I can have the wife post up with various facts from several research projects she has been a part of. I'm sure even though she is bound by contracts there are still some things in which she can discuss openly. If not, then when the information is pusblished I will be sure to het you a copy all though since it will not side with ideology you will attempt to discredit the findings by stating what ever you can muster from other intrusted sources.

However, no since in dragging this out as it is. I have no further reason to discuss this further as obviously this is just a debate of ideas rather then facts it would seem.

I wasn't adjusting facts or ideas. I was showing you different ideas from different countries. My viewpoint is that not all drugs are bad, and that you can't tell me they are just because they're drugs. Show me the proof. Show me some of the studies you've read/participated in. Show me whatever you can from your wife(I already told you to do this, in my last post... not sure why you're saying if I wish).

You're talking about ideology again, which honestly doesn't need to be brought up here. Why is that everyone's argument? "I'm right, and you're completely radical and wrong and stupid and misinformed and use clouded judgment and are incredibly bad because you aren't afraid to go against the grain to find the truth." Look at objective studies of drugs. Find out what their effects are on the body, long term. Find out why people do different drugs(not just the same three drugs shown on anti-drug posters and advertisements). Show me that they're harmful. Show me that there are degenerative effects on brain cells, or brain function(memory doesn't count; people can't explain memory anymore than they can dreaming), or the nervous, digestive, cardiovascular, or excretory system. You still don't know what chemical I'm talking about, but you obviously don't care. You know that if you don't need something, it's harmful. I think you're the one with a stupid ideology.

I'm pretty tickled that you called me funny though. Thanks.

If you don't want to post anymore about this in the topic, PM me. I'd love to prove you wrong, even if it's on an individual level.

And Buck -- You've said the same thing to another post of mine, which was far longer than the one in this topic. I wouldn't have even made the post if Pro-Rabbit hadn't come in here calling people stupid.

 

[pro-rabbit 5,000+ posts]

I wasn't adjusting facts or ideas. I was showing you different ideas from different countries. My viewpoint is that not all drugs are bad, and that you can't tell me they are just because they're drugs. Show me the proof. Show me some of the studies you've read/participated in. Show me whatever you can from your wife(I already told you to do this, in my last post... not sure why you're saying if I wish).
You're talking about ideology again, which honestly doesn't need to be brought up here. Why is that everyone's argument? "I'm right, and you're completely radical and wrong and stupid and misinformed and use clouded judgment and are incredibly bad because you aren't afraid to go against the grain to find the truth." Look at objective studies of drugs. Find out what their effects are on the body, long term. Find out why people do different drugs(not just the same three drugs shown on anti-drug posters and advertisements). Show me that they're harmful. Show me that there are degenerative effects on brain cells, or brain function(memory doesn't count; people can't explain memory anymore than they can dreaming), or the nervous, digestive, cardiovascular, or excretory system. You still don't know what chemical I'm talking about, but you obviously don't care. You know that if you don't need something, it's harmful. I think you're the one with a stupid ideology.

I'm pretty tickled that you called me funny though. Thanks.

If you don't want to post anymore about this in the topic, PM me. I'd love to prove you wrong, even if it's on an individual level.

And Buck -- You've said the same thing to another post of mine, which was far longer than the one in this topic. I wouldn't have even made the post if Pro-Rabbit hadn't come in here calling people stupid.

You just redirect what I say. This is what I find funny. I'm my original post drugs and chemicals used in a non directed or directed way harm your body. No two ways about it. I'm not what your debate is other then you say they have only short term issues. This because keen term studies are long term and nothing is published until they are finished or have surprising finding to represent. Your ability say anything more then prove me wrong is that. A quick Google search would show more studies have been done on various legal and non-legal chemicals/drugs showing negative results. When you start talking about increasig or decreasing dopamine you are talking about increasing and decreasing levels of mental state that can and does push people into depression. Your also ignoring the fact of addiction and the ending results become a product of what they are taking to get their wanted results. Feel free to pm with links to the stuides in which you refear showing next to no issues from taking the drug/chemical. I will gladly continue this in pm and even a phone/web cast conversation where my wife can take a larger roll in this and point out more fact and various studies as she knows far more then I do with that field.

 

[bubbagumper6 5,000+ posts]

cliffs?

 

[thevic24 5,000+ posts]

cliffs?

One dude says that drug A is ok because he preforms a purity "test", other dude says that the chemicals in drug B or ok......

Shit, I just lost my self.....

 

[bubbagumper6 5,000+ posts]

lulz //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smokin.gif.f1dc8d2acb1809e863ebd6a47eaa0d45.gif

 

[pro-rabbit 5,000+ posts]

One dude says that drug A is ok because he preforms a purity "test", other dude says that the chemicals in drug B or ok......

Shit, I just lost my self.....

I side both have negative issues the will arise lol...

No one wants to ready the short novels posted?

Mrdeadeye I got your pm, I will get back to in a few, I have been posting from my phone while the wife is shopping. LOL

 

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

You just redirect what I say. This is what I find funny. I'm my original post drugs and chemicals used in a non directed or directed way harm your body. No two ways about it. I'm not what your debate is other then you say they have only short term issues. This because keen term studies are long term and nothing is published until they are finished or have surprising finding to represent. Your ability say anything more then prove me wrong is that. A quick Google search would show more studies have been done on various legal and non-legal chemicals/drugs showing negative results. When you start talking about increasig or decreasing dopamine you are talking about increasing and decreasing levels of mental state that can and does push people into depression. Your also ignoring the fact of addiction and the ending results become a product of what they are taking to get their wanted results. Feel free to pm with links to the stuides in which you refear showing next to no issues from taking the drug/chemical. I will gladly continue this in pm and even a phone/web cast conversation where my wife can take a larger roll in this and point out more fact and various studies as she knows far more then I do with that field.

I didn't redirect what you said. I've read everything you've said, and told you that you're wrong. Using drugs(in a non directed or directed way) doesn't necessarily harm your body. There are SEVERAL ways about the effects of drugs, depending on how much you use, how frequently you use them, and subtle differences in your brain chemistry.

Thank you for bringing the hormone issue. The reason people go into depression(the length and intensity of the depression depends solely on how much of the drug you use) is actually simple to explain, and even more simple to prevent. There is a specific balance of serotonin and dopamine in the body that's needed to be normal rather than overly happy or depressed. You obviously know this, and I'm not trying to say you don't. What I'm saying you don't know is that while a certain drug(let's say LSD) is active in your brain/body, it is activating those specific serotonin, dopamine, etc., receptors. What this does is put an amount of stress(stress isn't harm) on those receptors. These receptors, like every receptor in the body, are actively mutating(using mutating because I can't think of a better word to use and don't feel like thinking more). For instance, when you're inside the house with the AC set on 70 degrees, and walk outside, the receptors in your skin and eyes tell you that some stimulus is providing you with heat. As you stay outside longer, those receptors no longer scream out, "HEAT! HEAT! HEAT!", and you feel more comfortable. Once you're outside for a long period of time and go back into the cooled house, you feel colder than you were in the house.

The same logic applies to serotonin and dopamine receptors in the brain. While you're operating normally, you aren't necessarily happy or sad. When you do LSD, your serotonin and dopamine(and others) receptors scream out, "Woah! Far out, man!". Once you come back down(read, inside the cool house), you feel less happy because you are no longer experiencing the same amount of release from the serotonin receptors. Now, that was a simple analogy, and could be explained on a different level, but I felt this was the best way to explain the effects.

Addiction wasn't brought into my argument because drug use and drug abuse are completely different, and should be treated as such. Chances are, if you abuse a drug, you do it for a deeper reason. Maybe you had a bad childhood. Maybe your dad touched you. Maybe you were picked on in school. Maybe your parents died. There are many different reasons for people to "turn to drugs", or to "rely on drugs". If drugs weren't readily available, or if chips and Little Debbie's snacks were better at making them numb than drugs, then they'd surely abuse those, or they'd abuse medicine or alcohol.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

 

[MisterDeadeye 10+ year member]

One dude says that drug A is ok because he preforms a purity "test", other dude says that the chemicals in drug B or ok......

Shit, I just lost my self.....

If I'm the other dude, then my argument is far more complex than chemicals in drug B are okay. Still, I understand where you're coming from.

Pro-rabbit -- Cool. I'm really not trying to be an asshole or anything.

 

[pro-rabbit 5,000+ posts]

If I'm the other dude, then my argument is far more complex than chemicals in drug B are okay. Still, I understand where you're coming from.
Pro-rabbit -- Cool. I'm really not trying to be an asshole or anything.

Nor am I. I just don't want people to get the impression that negative effects are non-existent or irrelevant. I don't hate or discriminate against people who use them. It is not my life to dictate what others should or shouldn't do. I just want to help others or even those who do them to understand issues that may not be completely clear.

I did ask Amber(my wife) about the most recent case study they did, but the findings won't be published until later this year or next so she is unable to discuss that. However she did say that she can and would discuss other tests she has been a part of. She also said that her superior has been studying neurological side effects and some finds a very astounding.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

Are we talking about pills right now?

 

[sacsking916 5,000+ posts]

Who wants to join me on this kush blunt?