Psycho-Babble Medication | about biological treatments | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ

Re: Healthy Psychotic states! » steve

Posted by JahL on March 22, 2001, at 20:48:27

In reply to Healthy Psychotic states! » JahL, posted by steve on March 22, 2001, at 19:51:44


> > I think you didn't get the point I was trying to make. Being in a psychotic state clearly is "seriously wrong."

I got yr point. You *didn't* say "being in a psychotic state is seriously wrong", you said there is something 'seriously wrong' with those who choose to experiment with hallucinogens. Two quite different statements. Also, maybe you shld substitute 'unhealthy' for 'wrong', a word which carries connotations of immorality.

> >If it weren't we'd have to rethink our laws pertaining to involuntary commitment, the DSM, and lastly what it means to be human. To voluntarily become psychotic is simply stupid imo,

In your opinion.

> > and a good way to go about qualifying for the Darwin Award. You told Eric that an acclaimed neurologist had ruled out any connection between your hallucinogen use and subsequent mental disorders. I can find you an acclaimed neurologist or shrink that Dr. Breggin cites, who testified that the likeliness of becoming addicted to benzos is about 5 per million. Just because a doctor tell you something is safe doesn't make it so,

Really? Read some of my posts & you will see I am a little more cynical about pdocs than your average man! I don't dispute that street drugs can precipitate serious psychiatric disorders, it just isn't so in my case (for reasons I can't be bothered to explain).

> > and to me it would seem prudent to err on the side of caution.

Which is why I've given up...

> > > Also, *English* authorities realize that the forces which shape recreational drug use are infinitely more complex than you imply. It goes *way* beyond personality flaws, or whatever it is you're suggesting.

> > I don't know what you are trying to say with this.

Simple. You suggest people take drugs because of a serious personal defect, & that the 'authorities' concur. I say you're plain wrong. People take drugs 4 all sorts of reasons (peer pressure, the allure etc).

> > don't you think it is a little drole that some herbal dopamine reuptake inhibitors like cocaine are banned, whereas non-herbal, patented ones like Prozac and Wellbutrin are advertised on tv?

Absolutely. As I remember reading, the clampdown on cocaine (a *relatively* innocuous drug) came about through (erroneous) media-created hysteria in the early 20thC concerning 'cocaine-crazed negroes' raping southern white women. A moral panic ensued & the rest is history...

> > To me it would seem that they are either all inherently dangerous, or that they are all safe. Which do you think?

Surely any drug (legal or otherwise) carries an inherent risk; I guess it all comes down to proper usage.

J.


Share
Tweet  

Thread

 

Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post


Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.

 

Start a new thread

 
Google
dr-bob.org www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for
in

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Medication | Framed

poster:JahL thread:56948
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20010319/msgs/57223.html