"Homebrew" Psilocybin Created By Scientists Using "Widely Available" Materials

[ch33zw1z]

I made a judgement over my observations of what i've read of his in the past few years.

Based on my observations of you over the last few years, you're grip on reality is fleeting. I wouldn't say your the best assessor of others abilities.

 

[sdifox]

That's the point. You make something legal, well then it's legal. No reason not to put it in drinks.

Now if you are talking about having a strong state control over something that's different.

Government selling pot drinks xd

Beverages | OCS

OCS.ca offers a variety of THC and CBD infused beverages including tea and is the only legal online retailer of cannabis infused beverages in Ontario. For adults 19 years of age or older.

ocs.ca

 

[KMFJD]

this will give the scientists a better baseline on testing as it will be pure psylocybin , easier to determine correct dosages/affects

They have also been starting to use ketamine for depression and have also been seeing some great results from it.

 

[dank69]

Bans do work. Not absolutely, but they work.
Hand guns are banned in the UK (mostly), they are legally available in the US. What's the levels of ownership and hand gun associated come in both countries?
Alcohol is banned in some middle Eastern countries. What's the levels of drinking and alcohol related crime between them and the UK?
If heroin wasn't banned do you think we'd have a lot more problems than if you could buy it in Walmart?

Regarding alcohol bans, I imagine they only "work" in the mideast because of capital punishment. If you have to just pay a fine all you are doing is making it illegal for poor people and creating a new black market with all the negatives that come with it.

 

[WelshBloke]

Regarding alcohol bans, I imagine they only "work" in the mideast because of capital punishment. If you have to just pay a fine all you are doing is making it illegal for poor people and creating a new black market with all the negatives that come with it.

Well yeah. It's not a ban if there's no punishment.
I'm not saying that I'm for them! I like my booze and drugs! But bans do work to a certain extent.

 

[Muse]

Well yeah. It's not a ban if there's no punishment.
I'm not saying that I'm for them! I like my booze and drugs! But bans do work to a certain extent.

 

[Muse]

Regarding alcohol bans, I imagine they only "work" in the mideast because of capital punishment. If you have to just pay a fine all you are doing is making it illegal for poor people and creating a new black market with all the negatives that come with it.

Seriously? They just flat out kill you?

 

[hal2kilo]

Make heroin legal. Properly legal. And you are going to end up with soft drinks with it in with massive corporations pushing it.
Monster energy drinks with smack in anyone?

Didn't really work out for the UK. Don't know if you can be declared an addict an get free/subsidized heroin anymore. Portugal seems to have the best luck so far.

Portugal's Decriminalization Success For Addiction And Drug Abuse | Inspire Malibu

 

[WelshBloke]

Didn't really work out for the UK. Don't know if you can be declared an addict an get free/subsidized heroin anymore. Portugal seems to have the best luck so far.

Portugal's Decriminalization Success For Addiction And Drug Abuse | Inspire Malibu

It's not really legalised in Portugal. It's just less heavily controlled. You can't go and buy it in the corner shop, you can't advertise it.

 

[Pohemi]

It's not really legalised in Portugal. It's just less heavily controlled. You can't go and buy it in the corner shop, you can't advertise it.

They call it 'decriminalization', and while not quite the same as 'legalization', it is what could still lower usage of the drug and lower the amount of related black market activity and crime related to it. They basically just moved to a system of treatment instead of criminal incarceration, which I believe is a step in the right direction.

 

[MrSquished]

They call it 'decriminalization', and while not quite the same as 'legalization', it is what could still lower usage of the drug and lower the amount of related black market activity and crime related to it. They basically just moved to a system of treatment instead of criminal incarceration, which I believe is a step in the right direction.

We can't learn from other countries. Regressive ignorant GQP'ers like Taj don't like doing critical thinking type things like that. It goes against their values of being the most closeminded pieces of garbage that makes up their entire ideology.

 

[WelshBloke]

They call it 'decriminalization', and while not quite the same as 'legalization', it is what could still lower usage of the drug and lower the amount of related black market activity and crime related to it. They basically just moved to a system of treatment instead of criminal incarceration, which I believe is a step in the right direction.

I know how it works and I agree with it.

The point I was making was that bans do reduce the usage of the thing that's banned. They work from that perspective. I wasn't arguing that they are good for society or fix the greater problem.

 

[MrPickins]

Looks like a big complex system. I'm seeing P. Cubensis spore prints for ~$20 shipped at Ebay. Of course, you'd need a mushroom growing system to get fruits.

I heard years ago that P. Cubensis can be found on cow turds, e.g. in Texas. Not being in TX, I can't confirm this. I know all about spore prints, well not "all." But I have Mushrooms Demystified (really really good book), and have done amateur mushroom hunting, which really is big fun.

Officially, I can neither confirm, nor deny the existence of fields containing psilocybin shrooms around south TX "back in the day".

I can say that it would be an awfully rude thing not to tap the cap (to drop some spores) for the next guy, should you happen across any.

 

[ch33zw1z]

I know how it works and I agree with it.

The point I was making was that bans do reduce the usage of the thing that's banned. They work from that perspective. I wasn't arguing that they are good for society or fix the greater problem.

Not necessarily tho, prohibition in the U.S. hasnt seemed to work like that. Not like we could realistically measure it either, as drug use has a tendency to "dirty" the user in our society, so most people will just deny it until they can't.

 

[conehead433]

Decriminalization/legalization worked pretty well for the Netherlands. Getting heroin for free pretty much did away with a lot of the crimes associated with illegal drug trade. Of course the clinics would try to get you on methadone. And of course there are many who don't trust the government so they will never completely eliminate the black market. Another is that there are probably quite a few addicts who like riding the Horse, and don't really want to get off. A lot of heroin deaths can be attributed to not knowing the potency of the drugs you've obtained. In Amsterdam you can have you drugs tested for free (even if illegal) and be given recommendations on whether it's safe, dosage, etc., and no one is prosecuted.

 

[Muse]

A lot of heroin deaths can be attributed to not knowing the potency of the drugs you've obtained. In Amsterdam you can have you drugs tested for free (even if illegal) and be given recommendations on whether it's safe, dosage, etc., and no one is prosecuted.

Of course, anecdotally (but I have no reason to doubt it), a lot of heroin ODs happen because a former heavy user takes a dose they used to take not realizing that they no longer have the tolerance they'd built up.

 

[WelshBloke]

Not necessarily tho, prohibition in the U.S. hasnt seemed to work like that. Not like we could realistically measure it either, as drug use has a tendency to "dirty" the user in our society, so most people will just deny it until they can't.

Prohibition was pretty hideous. The government literally poisoned tens of thousands of people to stop people drinking.
Alcohol consumption during prohibition was lower at all points of prohibition than it was before and after though. So it did work from that narrow view of 'work'.

 

[cytg111]

That's incorrect. I don't believe we need more mind altering drugs, or a simplified method of obtaining them.

You can be as obtuse as you like, that doesn't change what I've said.

but… it was right there… in the quotes…. of what you said. Are you saying that what was said that what you said was never said and not said by you? What you are seeing happening right now is not happening? Thats some… I dont know what it is actually.

 

[Pipeline 1010]

Well yeah. It's not a ban if there's no punishment.
I'm not saying that I'm for them! I like my booze and drugs! But bans do work to a certain extent.

Bans only work when the demand for or availability of the banned item isn't high.

Where demand is high, there will be a black market. It will be lucrative, violent, and likely lead to more of whatever it is you tried to ban. See: alcohol prohibition, war on drugs, prostitution, etc....

Where availability and/or private ownership is high, it will be enormously challenging (or even impossible) to eliminate whatever it is that you are banning. See: guns in America. There is no way to eliminate a significant proportion of privately owned guns in American outside of a draconian, infinitely expensive, and violent/deadly door to door search and seizure operation. You can ban production and sale of guns, and presumably over 3-4 generations, you might be able to make progress as older guns break/stop functioning. But by then a lot of malfunctioning parts might be 3D printed anyways. And as always, if there is demand, there will be a supplier, whether it is government, legitimate business, or black market.

 

[WelshBloke]

Bans only work when the demand for or availability of the banned item isn't high.

Where demand is high, there will be a black market. It will be lucrative, violent, and likely lead to more of whatever it is you tried to ban. See: alcohol prohibition, war on drugs, prostitution, etc....

Where availability and/or private ownership is high, it will be enormously challenging (or even impossible) to eliminate whatever it is that you are banning. See: guns in America. There is no way to eliminate a significant proportion of privately owned guns in American outside of a draconian, infinitely expensive, and violent/deadly door to door search and seizure operation. You can ban production and sale of guns, and presumably over 3-4 generations, you might be able to make progress as older guns break/stop functioning. But by then a lot of malfunctioning parts might be 3D printed anyways. And as always, if there is demand, there will be a supplier, whether it is government, legitimate business, or black market.

The point is that ownership/usage of banned items nearly always goes down after an enforced ban. I'm struggling to think of a ban that had teeth that didn't lead to a reduction in use. Especially if you take social trends into account.

Opium based products were pretty ubiquitous in Victorian England, you could buy them in most shops. People used them to get their babies to sleep. That's what happens when stuff is fully legal.

 

[Pipeline 1010]

The point is that ownership/usage of banned items nearly always goes down after an enforced ban. I'm struggling to think of a ban that had teeth that didn't lead to a reduction in use. Especially if you take social trends into account.

Opium based products were pretty ubiquitous in Victorian England, you could buy them in most shops. People used them to get their babies to sleep. That's what happens when stuff is fully legal.

Really? There is arguably more drug usage in the U.S. now than before the war on drugs began. That war has been enforced to the tune of $1Trillion. I would say $1 Trillion counts as "teeth".

 

[WelshBloke]

Really? There is arguably more drug usage in the U.S. now than before the war on drugs began. That war has been enforced to the tune of $1Trillion. I would say $1 Trillion counts as "teeth".

That's why I put that bit about social trends in there.
If all drugs were freely available and had the force of advertising modern business can leverage do you honestly think that drug use would go down?

 

[Pipeline 1010]

That's why I put that bit about social trends in there.
If all drugs were freely available and had the force of advertising modern business can leverage do you honestly think that drug use would go down?

There aren't only 2 options: ban or free-for-all. There is a middle ground, decriminalization and treatment. See Portugal. They decriminalized drugs and started treating it as a medical issue instead of a criminal issue. Their drug usage rates plummeted despite social trends (of increasing drug usage rates) throughout the entire rest of Europe, because they treated the root cause and have reduced demand. Their success has lasted nearly 2 decades thus far.

I think my initial point still stands: Bans only work when the demand for or availability of the banned item isn't high. Wanna reduce something? Reduce the demand for that thing....treat the underlying issue. A ban is the lazy man's "feel good", "look at me I care and I'm helping" solution and doesn't typically work much better than a bandaid works on a broken bone.

 

[WelshBloke]

There aren't only 2 options: ban or free-for-all. There is a middle ground, decriminalization and treatment. See Portugal. They decriminalized drugs and started treating it as a medical issue instead of a criminal issue. Their drug usage rates plummeted despite social trends (of increasing drug usage rates) throughout the entire rest of Europe, because they treated the root cause and have reduced demand. Their success has lasted nearly 2 decades thus far.

I think my initial point still stands: Bans only work when the demand for or availability of the banned item isn't high. Wanna reduce something? Reduce the demand for that thing....treat the underlying issue. A ban is the lazy man's "feel good", "look at me I care and I'm helping" solution and doesn't typically work much better than a bandaid works on a broken bone.

I wasn't making a point about what I thought the best approach was, I was just saying that bans do work in that they reduce usage. Whether there are better options is undeniable.

 

[Muse]

See: guns in America. There is no way to eliminate a significant proportion of privately owned guns in American outside of a draconian, infinitely expensive, and violent/deadly door to door search and seizure operation. You can ban production and sale of guns, and presumably over 3-4 generations, you might be able to make progress as older guns break/stop functioning. But by then a lot of malfunctioning parts might be 3D printed anyways. And as always, if there is demand, there will be a supplier, whether it is government, legitimate business, or black market.

Guns? That's a very different thing than consumables, i.e. drugs, alcohol. You don't eat, smoke, drink or inject guns. It would be WAY easier to get guns out of people's hands than you envision. Even with 3D printing capabilities. If you make it illegal to possess a gun, what earthly good could a gun do you? Use or get discovered having it and you go to prison. A gun would be worse than worthless under those conditions.