"But Rachel also has another hobby, one that makes her a bit different from the other moms in her Texas suburb—not that she talks about it with them. Once a month or so, after she and her husband put the kids to bed, Rachel texts her in-laws—who live just down the street—to make sure they’re home and available in the event of an emergency.

“And then, Rachel takes a generous dose of magic mushrooms, or sometimes MDMA, and—there’s really no other way to say this— spends the next several hours tripping balls.”

  • Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    27 days ago

    If only people spent any time actually investigating what was said and not defaulting to pearl clutching because of the propaganda they’ve been fed, we could live in a much better world.

    We know people can use alcohol responsibly. And alcohol is the most debilitating, aggression causing and all around harmful substance. In some data, it loses out to hard core opiates, but in most aspects, alcohol is genuinely more risky.

    Serotonergic substances, such as MDMA and mushrooms are less harmful than cannabis.

    https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2019/06/25/what-is-the-most-dangerous-drug

    Serotonergic substances have been shown to have extremely positive effect for mental health when used in a responsible and reasonable way, such as doing them once a month with good preparation. Usually most people trip perhaps once or a couple of times a year, but once a month isn’t “too much”. If it was weekly, then that would be a bit excessive. But remember that with drug abuse issues in terms of other substances, like alcohol, tobacco, meth, opiates, your would have to do them daily.

    It’s rather impossible to binge shrooms, lsd or ecstasy. They just stop working so fast. If alcohol built tolerance at the same speed, after a few drinks, you’d need double to feel the same, and after a sixpack, you’d hardly feel anything unless you started drinking straight up booze and even that wouldn’t get you drunk.

    As in, you could want to binge shrooms or lsd or mdma once you start, but even if you shove your face into it, 24 hours later you’re just not going to be high. You might be rather confused if you’ve just stayed up binging, as it will have an effect, but it’ll be more sleep deprivation at that point.

    I wish I could relay all my experience and knowledge on the subject. I’m absolutely convinced you would agree. But I know how much of the drug war propaganda stands between that understanding and arguing against it. Took me years to accept we need to legalise all drugs after realising we have to legalise cannabis. And that was like 20 years ago. It’s not to increase use. It’s to prevent abuse and take the trade away from criminals. (Taxing the global drug trade would easily cover ending world hunger, for one.)

    Here’s a great organisation to have a peek at.

    https://maps.org/

    Multidisciplinary Association of Psychedelic Studies.

    Founded in 1986, MAPS is a 501©(3) nonprofit research and educational organization that develops medical, legal, and cultural contexts for people to benefit from the careful uses of psychedelics and marijuana. MAPS previously sponsored the most advanced psychedelic-assisted therapy research in the world and continues to support psychedelic and marijuana research with a focus on the people and places most impacted by trauma.

    Hope that answers some of your questions, although, I expect a lot of the viewpoints I have are straight up unacceptable to you for some reason or another.

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        27 days ago

        It’s quantifying harm, among other things. The difference between free base cocaine (aka crack) and cocaine is nothing, you’re right. But unfortunately the method of using it usually smoking with crack, and that leads to more harm. If you’re a very casual user, you’re more likely to snort cocaine than smoke crack. Which is why there’s a seeming disparity.

        The difference in userbase isn’t as big in the UK as it is in the US, afaik.

          • Dasus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            27 days ago

            Bruh.

            Read the chart.

            Who’s said anything about killing?

            It’s quantifying harm. A lot of people smoke cannabis. Smoking is not healthy. One might even be inclined to say harmful. (Edit just adding this here, it’s not saying cannabis in itself is harmful directly [edit2 although obviously it’s not completely risk free, just practically], it’s quantifying the harms that come from use. So that graph would be different if everyone vaped or only took edibles, for instance.)

            That’s why crack is so much higher as well. Smoking tends to be more addictive as well, no matter the substance. (“Addiction” being different from “dependence”.)

                  • Dasus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    ·
                    27 days ago

                    I can show you evidence of smoking causing lung cancer. Do you think smoking cannabis magically makes the smoke healthy?

                    While cannabinoids aren’t carcinogenic, a lot of the byproducts of smoking are.

                    This isn’t even debatable, man. Smoking is unhealthy. Were people to only use edibles, I doubt there’d be any mortality of any sort to report. And I doubt the veracity of the mortality rate in general. (I didn’t notice it, my bad for saying “read the chart, bruh”, as I was the one who had poorly skimmed it, because I’m rather high and thought I remembered what it said.) The mortality rate, afaik, would include things like if someone smoked only cannabis, got lung cancer, then those medical files would probably count towards this stat. I’m thinking there’s probably cases where some drunk driver has died in some way, and they test the blood, find alcohol and a tiny bit of cannabis, and then list “driving on drugs (cannabis)” as the reason or something.

                    https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2516340/

                    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23846283/

                    If you’ve only ever vaped, (and not vape-liquids, but actual herb vaporisers) I don’t think you’re much at risk of lung cancer, really. I should like to see evidence to the contrary, and until I do, I don’t think I’ll believe it. Smoking, on the other hand? Drawing the byproducts of combustion into your lungs? Yes, I’m sure it causes cancer. And scientists tend to agree.

                    I’m off to hit my bong, all this talk of lung cancer made my lungs leak; got to go tar them a bit.

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        27 days ago

        I think I made a lot of other points besides the remark that we need to reform most drug laws.

        • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          27 days ago

          The other point you made was “psychedelics aren’t necessarily worse than alcohol or cannabis”, and I feel like I already responded to a similar point elsewhere.

          Getting drunk (or high) with children in the house is also not good. I would not expect that to be applauded either.

          You mentioned “responsible” alcohol use. Getting drunk around your children is not responsible alcohol use.

          People who drink responsibly either have a single drink or two and stop before they get intoxicated, or they go out and hire a babysitter, or they send the kids to the grandparents for the night.

          (If you are “tripping balls” and unable to drive, you are intoxicated.)

          • Dasus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            27 days ago

            I didn’t say “get drunk” around children. I said use alcohol responsibly. Do you believe one can do that around alcohol, or is everyone who has a glass of wine with dinner an irresponsible parent?

            Just like with alcohol, the dosage matters. The mother isn’t “tripping balls” by doing a bit of MDMA or shrooms. That’s just exaggeration by the article. There’s no mention of a dosage, but to “trip balls” on MDMA, you’d need to do quite a bit. Same with shrooms. Several times the normal recreational dose, just like with alcohol.

            People who drink responsibly either have a single drink or two and stop before they get intoxicated

            But one or two drinks is still intoxication. It might be very mild intoxication, but it is intoxication. You might not believe it, but actually, similarly responsible low dosage recreational use exists with other substances as well. Just because your chosen drug is illegal doesn’t mean you shoot it up into your eyeballs and don’t stop until your whole stash is gone and then go out to prostitute yourself to get some more.

            Have you ever had any serotonergic substances, like shrooms, LSD, ecstasy? No? You have no idea how they influence you and how they might or might not impair you? But… I do? And other people do? And science seems to support the things we say about them; people who haven’t used them always fearmonger over them, they’re less harmful and less impairing than alcohol, and still more pleasant. It’s a wholly different effect.

            Do you think people who have a prescription for sedatives or antianxiety medications are irresponsible parents? Should they take their children to stay somewhere every time they take an Ambien before they go to bed? Oh wait… then, they’d never sleep in the same place, unless there were other people there as well? Don’t you think it extremely irresponsible to have a sleeping aid before bed… you know, in case of an emergency. Better — just to be safe — take your kids to your in-laws every single night that you might be inclined to think you need a sleeping aid.

            I don’t believe you could stand behind something like that in good faith.

            And I know that an Ambien impairs a person more than a light recreational dose of LSD or ecstasy or shrooms.

            • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              27 days ago

              But one or two drinks is still intoxication. It might be very mild intoxication, but it is intoxication. You might not believe it, but actually, similarly responsible low dosage recreational use exists with other substances as well. […] they’re less harmful and less impairing than alcohol,

              You said in another comment:

              A basic recreational dose of MDMA or LSD would enhance my evening and I wouldn’t be fit to drive a car

              You’re the one who said you wouldn’t be fit to drive a car.

              And I’m not trying to defend alcohol use, but after one or two drinks (depending on your body size), you can still legally drive a car.

              (And this isn’t some bizarre hypothetical. There are plenty of people who have a glass of wine with dinner, and that’s it. They’re not drinking for any of the intoxicating effects of alcohol.)

              In any case, I still don’t see how “it’s less harmful than alcohol” means we should be applauding its use, unless you think that its use would result in less alcohol use.

              And I know that an Ambien impairs a person more than a light recreational dose of LSD or ecstasy or shrooms.

              And I doubt anyone would be cheering about increased Ambien use among Texas housewives.

              • Dasus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                27 days ago

                And I’m not trying to defend alcohol use, but after one or two drinks (depending on your body size), you can still legally drive a car.

                After one or two drinks, you are intoxicated, and by so little, that most think “oh, I’m not affected”. Which is why driving after the first one or two is actually more risky than the people who drive when they think they’re just on the edge of the limit. This is countries with a limit of 0.5‰, meaning 0.05%. Above that it’s really irresponsible to be driving, and in the US, you’d legally be allowed to drive with a 0.8‰ BAC. It’s insane, honestly, and the drinking and driving culture in the States is something pretty abhorrent to me. In the sense that a lot of people think that it’s “okay to have a couple”.

                It’s not.

                Because during the first drinks, your “bias” is the highest. You’ll feel as if you’d be able to drive really well. Confidence is up. You don’t think you’re gonna make mistakes. Which is why so many mistakes happen.

                You don’t understand what being on LSD/MDMA feels like, but as I said, it’s less impairing than alcohol. The point is that it would not be responsible to drive a car. I bet that I’d still outdrive you and many others with a recreational dose under my belt. But I wouldn’t be fit in the sense that it wouldn’t be responsible to drive under the effect of any potentially intoxicating substance.

                I don’t know, I’m a third generation taxi driver and maybe I’m imposing too strict morals here, but it really seems like you have a really strong double-standard going on here. Driving drunk is fine, but being at home on MDMA isn’t if the kids are there?

                And I doubt anyone would be cheering about increased Ambien use among Texas housewives.

                But would you go far as to say it’s irresponsible for a parent to take an Ambien if there’s children in the house?

                You keep doing this. You keep saying “cheering” and “applauding” and whatever synonyms one might come up with for the act of encouraging something. No-one has encouraged anything.

                What you remind me is a pearl clutching aunt/uncle in the 90’s who’s getting upset over a gay character in a movie. “No but think of how this will encourage children to be gay, this shouldn’t be in movies!”

                No, it won’t. Just like writing an article about MDMA use doesn’t mean that people are advocating for everyone to be high 247. Or even try out MDMA or something. Which, I could actually advocate for anyone to do if they’re in a position to and never have. It certainly would help you a lot with your psychological hangups. I thought you genuinely wanted to know why people do it. But no, you’re just another willfully ignorant person who’s spreading the propaganda they so easily bought into.

                “If you take MDMA with a partner, it feels almost like you can accomplish what you would in, like, five years of couples counseling, in a night.”

                That’s why people do it.

                • HomerianSymphony@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  27 days ago

                  Just like writing an article about MDMA use doesn’t mean that people are advocating for everyone to be high 247.

                  When I said applauding, I was refering to people in this thread, not the writer of the article.

                  And I didn’t say driving drunk was okay.

                  Also, I feel like you’re being unnecessarily hostile by repeatedly calling me ignorant and accusing me of pearl-clutching, and if you keep if up, I’m just gonna block you.

                  I have a bit of knowledge about this topic too, you know.

                  • Dasus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    27 days ago

                    Again, you’re ignoring all the points. Thus you are being willfully ignorant about the facts of the matter. I’m not calling you an ignorant person in general. I’m saying you — like at least >50% of people — are being willfully ignorant.

                    You’re treating taking MDMA as if it was impairing, while you don’t seem to have experience on what taking serotonergic substances feels like. You’re dismissing the points on why people do it, despite that being your question originally, as far as I understood.

                    If you’re perceiving this as hostile, it’s probably because you’re not perceiving your comments or attitude as in any way offensive. When they are. It’s offensive to be generalised as a “drug user”, which equates peaceful, responsible recreational users to abusers using “proper” hard drugs.

                    I have a bit of knowledge about this topic too, you know.