What Is The Least Damaging Mind Altering Substance?

jaa

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
1,035
In a similar vein, what is the least damaging mind altering substance to consume in the framework of Ray Peat health?

I've tried low dose LSD, but that feels like a bit of a waste. Eating marijuana is less esterogenic than smoking it right? Is it still harmful?

What about:
1) Psilocybin? First impression is it would be similar to LSD yet prob a bit more toxic.
2) MDMA? Likely no bueno. Releases serotonin and may induce serotonin syndrome.
3) DMT? Maybe the best? They recently found it in the pineal glands of rats.

Clearly I have very little idea what I'm talking about. Can anyone help me out?
 

Vinero

Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2013
Messages
1,551
Age
32
Location
Netherlands
Re: Alcohol: Which is Least Estrogenic?

I have wondered about that too. I usually go out on friday and saturday and drinking makes me very tired and also gives me killer hangovers. I have tried Psilocybin mushrooms, LSD, and MDMA multiple times on nights out and they were unimaginably more fun and energetic than drinking. But I am concered as well for the health effects of these substances as there does not seem to be much information from Ray Peat's point of view
 

Asimov

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
162
Re: Alcohol: Which is Least Estrogenic?

You guys crack me up. The hallucinogen with the least damaging effects is the one with the least amount of hallucinogen.

Hallucinations are the brains response to either acute stress or a lack of stimuli (also probably pretty stressful in it's own right to the brain). I'm not an expert on the field but what I do know is that ALL hallucinogens share a common trait of mimicking and replacing serotonin in the brain (in non Peat parlance, they "have affinity for binding to serotonin receptors").

From what you know about Peat, do you think a drug that basically acts as a super powerful version of serotonin could ever be good for you? The effects you desire are exactly the cause of the damage you wish to avoid.

If you wanna do LSD, don't pretend like it's a health choice. Just do it and deal with the consequences.
 
OP
J

jaa

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
1,035
Asimov said:
You guys crack me up. The hallucinogen with the least damaging effects is the one with the least amount of hallucinogen.

Hallucinations are the brains response to either acute stress or a lack of stimuli (also probably pretty stressful in it's own right to the brain). I'm not an expert on the field but what I do know is that ALL hallucinogens share a common trait of mimicking and replacing serotonin in the brain (in non Peat parlance, they "have affinity for binding to serotonin receptors").

From what you know about Peat, do you think a drug that basically acts as a super powerful version of serotonin could ever be good for you? The effects you desire are exactly the cause of the damage you wish to avoid.

If you wanna do LSD, don't pretend like it's a health choice. Just do it and deal with the consequences.

From http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/serotonin-depression-aggression.shtml

"by its policy of denigrating and incriminating LSD, a powerful serotonin (approximate) antagonist"

"In animal studies LSD, and other anti-serotonin agents, increase playfulness and accelerate learning, and cause behavioral impairment only at very high doses. "

I don't think Ray Peat believes LSD is harmful because of it's effects on serotonin receptors. It seems like he believes the opposite. Maybe this isn't true in high doses, because as you mentioned, hallucinating can be a pretty stressful event. That said, why shouldn't you consider the healthiest recreational drugs to take? Isn't that what this thread is all about? LSD and psilocybin are consistently ranked among the least harmful of recreational drugs in scientific studies. And compared to a night of drinking, it takes much less of a toll on your body the following day, so seems much less stressful in that regard.
 
OP
J

jaa

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
1,035
Re: Alcohol: Which is Least Estrogenic?

Thanks for that info Asimov!
 

jb4566

Member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
72
Re: Alcohol: Which is Least Estrogenic?

Asimov,

It sounds like you have never taken lsd, I don't mean to be rude but maybe you shouldn't be giving out advice about it. People might get the wrong idea. There absolutely is a point to taking lsd in low doses, it is not an all or nothing experience.
 

jb4566

Member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
72
Re: Alcohol: Which is Least Estrogenic?

Also it is untrue that all mind altering drugs are harmful. For example lsd is useful in treating headaches: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16801660

It is helpful in treating alcoholism: http://jop.sagepub.com/content/early/20 ... 3.abstract

Also lsd has an extremely low toxicity, straight from the horse's mouth:

The minute doses that cause death in animal experiments may give the impression that LSD is a very toxic substance. However, if one compares the lethal dose in animals with the effective dose in human beings, which is 0.0003-0.001 mg/kg (0.0003 to 0.001 thousandths of a gram per kilogram of body weight), this shows an extraordinarily low toxicity for LSD. Only a 300- to 600-fold overdose of LSD, compared to the lethal dose in rabbits, or fully a 50,000- to 100,000fold overdose, in comparison to the toxicity in the mouse, would have fatal results in human beings. These comparisons of relative toxicity are, to be sure, only understandable as estimates of orders of magnitude, for the determination of the therapeutic index (that is, the ratio between the effective and the lethal dose) is only meaningful within a given species. Such a procedure is not possible in this case because the lethal dose of LSD for humans is not known. To my knowledge, there have not as yet occurred any casualties that are a direct consequence of LSD poisoning. Numerous episodes of fatal consequences attributed to LSD ingestion have indeed been recorded, but these were accidents, even suicides, that may be attributed to the mentally disoriented condition of LSD intoxication. The danger of LSD lies not in its toxicity, but rather in the unpredictability of its psychic effects.
-Albert Hofmann

http://www.psychedelic-library.org/child2.htm
 

Asimov

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
162
Re: Alcohol: Which is Least Estrogenic?

I don't think those studies really amount to anything.

One is a non-placebo controlled study asking if a powerful serotonin mimic reduces headaches. No ***t it makes your head hurt less, probably because the brain is being flooded with stress hormones to reduce pain. SSRI's have also been shown beyond a shadow of a doubt to reduce pain. Would you advise someone take prozac for the headaches? Because LSD and prozac work along the exact same lines as far as reducing headaches (activation of serotonin receptors in brain metabolism)

The other is a meta-study asking if one powerful drug reduces the use of another. Is this not common sense? Methadone has been proven to be efficacious in treating morphine addiction. Does that mean methadone is good for you?

LSD probably isn't acutely toxic. Neither is serotonin. Neither is good for you. That's completely besides the point of the conversation.

I don't mean to be rude, but you sound like a drug addict trying to justify your behaviors. You don't sound as if you're able to taken an objective, rational stance on the drug due to your current investment into it's use. And you're sure as hell not giving anyone else good advice, considering you know nothing about the biology or chemistry of the drug in question. If you want to take LSD, I'm OK with that. Just don't blow smoke up anyone's **** and pretend you're doing it for health reasons.

I don't normally scout pubmed to "argue" with people online, but since you're recommending dangerous drugs to people as if they're M&M's without a second thought, here's a little case study to keep in mind.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23222128

The title: "Self-inflicted testicular amputation in first lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) use"

Enjoy your LSD......
 
J

j.

Guest
Re: Alcohol: Which is Least Estrogenic?

Asimov said:
I don't normally scout pubmed to "argue" with people online, but since you're recommending dangerous drugs to people as if they're M&M's without a second thought, here's a little case study to keep in mind.

With alcohol.

You could do it in a safe environment with no tools to be extra careful.
 

Jenn

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2013
Messages
1,035
Re: Alcohol: Which is Least Estrogenic?

"Numerous episodes of fatal consequences attributed to LSD ingestion have indeed been recorded, but these were accidents, even suicides, that may be attributed to the mentally disoriented condition of LSD intoxication. The danger of LSD lies not in its toxicity, but rather in the unpredictability of its psychic effects. "

Uh...dead is dead, even if your brain may have been happy at the time. ;)
 
OP
J

jaa

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
1,035
One of the problems with LSD is it's not regulated and dosage could vary from say 20ug to 200ug. Another issue is our culture is a party culture, and people take drugs to get ****88 up. In a perfect world you could check yourself into a clinic and experiment with lsd in a safe environment. Not sure what my point is other than I believe lsd to be a positive life experience in most cases if used correctly.
 
J

j.

Guest
jaa said:
One of the problems with LSD is it's not regulated and dosage could vary from say 20ug to 200ug.

Couldn't you give it to your cat or rat to see the reaction and estimate the dosage?
 

jb4566

Member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
72
This report shows that a first and single use of lysergic acid diethylamide in combination with alcohol can cause intoxication with dramatic consequences.

That report does not show that lsd caused Self-inflicted testicular amputation, it shows that lsd and alcohol together created that situation.

Also, I'm not recommending that people take lsd, especially if they don't know the source of the drug. All I'm saying is that it is a little extreme to denounce a drug as inherently bad or good, context is everything. The fact is that some people do benefit from taking lsd and others do not. I just felt like Asimov's comments were very one sided and did not tell the whole story.

Also, as a side note here is a balanced overview of lsd if anyone is interested in more information: http://www.maps.org/research/lsd/swisslsd/IB_LSD.pdf
 

jb4566

Member
Joined
May 30, 2013
Messages
72
One of the problems with LSD is it's not regulated and dosage could vary from say 20ug to 200ug. Another issue is our culture is a party culture, and people take drugs to get ****88 up. In a perfect world you could check yourself into a clinic and experiment with lsd in a safe environment. Not sure what my point is other than I believe lsd to be a positive life experience in most cases if used correctly.

This is a very good point, it is important to have a good source. Also, some countries have programs in place in which one can anonymously submit a street drug for purity testing.
 
OP
J

jaa

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
1,035
j. said:
jaa said:
One of the problems with LSD is it's not regulated and dosage could vary from say 20ug to 200ug.

Couldn't you give it to your cat or rat to see the reaction and estimate the dosage?

:D

Maybe the next step is to get a lab rats and come up with my own diet.
 

4peatssake

Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
2,055
Age
62
Some 20 odd years ago, I happened across the work of Czech psychiatrist Stanislav Grof, one of the founders of transpersonal psychology and reknowned for his research into the human psyche using LSD. At the time, his work was obscure except within the academic circles he ran in but I read with interest his wife Christina's book, entitled,"The Stormy Search for the Self" as it fed my keen interest in expanding consciousness at that time. I also read his book "The Holotropic Mind"

It was particularly interesting, although not surprising, to me when I read that Ray Peat was familar with Grof.

Ray Peat said:
Some people, such as Stanislav Grof, advocated the therapeutic use of LSD with a rationale that seems similar, for example to overcome chronic pain by changing its meaning, putting it into a different relation to the rest of experience. "In general, psychedelic therapy seems to be most effective in the treatment of alcoholics, narcotic-drug addicts, depressed patients, and individuals dying of cancer." 2 Since LSD shifts the balance away from serotonin dominance toward dopamine dominance, its effect can be to erase the habits of learned helplessness. Stress and pain also leave their residue in the endorphin system, and the anti-opiates such as naloxone can relieve depression, improve memory, and restore disturbed pituitary functions, for example leading to the restoration of menstrual rhythms interrupted by stress or aging. The amazing speed with which young animals can solve problems is undoubtedly a reflection of their metabolic vigor, and it is probably partly because they haven't yet experienced the paralysis that can result from repeated or prolonged and inescapable stress. Many of the factors responsible for the metabolic intensity of youth can be used therapeutically, even after dullness has developed. The right balance of amino acids and carbohydrates, and the avoidance of the antimetabolic unsaturated fatty acids, can make a great difference in mental functioning, even though we still don't know what the ideal formulas are.
Intuitive knowledge and its development

Clearly Grof's work establishes extraordinary possibilities within the realm of altered state of consciousness using LSD and other psychedelic substances. The substances can be used as a bridge to those states of consciousness which can also be accessed through meditation, vision quests, spiritual ceremonies etc. under the right conditions and using effective techniques.

This a bit about him on Wikipedia

Grof distinguishes between two modes of consciousness: the hylotropic and the holotropic. The hylotropic refers to "the normal, everyday experience of consensus reality." The holotropic refers to states which aim towards wholeness and the totality of existence. The holotropic is characteristic of non-ordinary states of consciousness such as meditative, mystical, or psychedelic experiences. According to Grof, these non-ordinary states are often categorized by contemporary psychiatry as psychotic. Grof connects the hylotropic to the Hindu conception of namarupa ("name and form"), the separate, individual, illusory self. He connects the holotropic to the Hindu conception of Atman-Brahman, the divine, true nature of the self. Grof believes that the holotropic mode has been uniquely de-emphasized in the modern West:

All the cultures in human history except the Western industrial civilization have held holotropic states of consciousness in great esteem. They induced them whenever they wanted to connect to their deities, other dimensions of reality, and with the forces of nature. They also used them for diagnosing and healing, cultivation of extrasensory perception, and artistic inspiration. They spent much time and energy to develop safe and effective ways of inducing them.

There are a number of YouTube videos about Grof and his work.

This is just a short 3 minute one.
http://youtu.be/mA1hDI5IiJQ (For some reason, I couldn't imbed the video) :?

Here's what Albert Hoffman said about Grof.

Albert Hoffman said:
If I am the father of LSD then Stanislav Grof is the godfather

(BTW, in case you haven't noticed, I moved this LSD discussion to its own thread) :mrgreen:
 

jaguar43

Member
Joined
Oct 10, 2012
Messages
1,310
Re: Alcohol: Which is Least Estrogenic?

Asimov said:
I don't think those studies really amount to anything.

One is a non-placebo controlled study asking if a powerful serotonin mimic reduces headaches. No s*** it makes your head hurt less, probably because the brain is being flooded with stress hormones to reduce pain. SSRI's have also been shown beyond a shadow of a doubt to reduce pain. Would you advise someone take prozac for the headaches? Because LSD and prozac work along the exact same lines as far as reducing headaches (activation of serotonin receptors in brain metabolism)

The other is a meta-study asking if one powerful drug reduces the use of another. Is this not common sense? Methadone has been proven to be efficacious in treating morphine addiction. Does that mean methadone is good for you?

LSD probably isn't acutely toxic. Neither is serotonin. Neither is good for you. That's completely besides the point of the conversation.

I don't mean to be rude, but you sound like a drug addict trying to justify your behaviors. You don't sound as if you're able to taken an objective, rational stance on the drug due to your current investment into it's use. And you're sure as hell not giving anyone else good advice, considering you know nothing about the biology or chemistry of the drug in question. If you want to take LSD, I'm OK with that. Just don't blow smoke up anyone's **** and pretend you're doing it for health reasons.

I don't normally scout pubmed to "argue" with people online, but since you're recommending dangerous drugs to people as if they're M&M's without a second thought, here's a little case study to keep in mind.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23222128

The title: "Self-inflicted testicular amputation in first lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) use"

Enjoy your LSD......



Stanislav Grof, advocated the therapeutic use of LSD with a rationale that seems similar, for example to overcome chronic pain by changing its meaning, putting it into a different relation to the rest of experience. "In general, psychedelic therapy seems to be most effective in the treatment of alcoholics, narcotic-drug addicts, depressed patients, and individuals dying of cancer." 2 Since LSD shifts the balance away from serotonin dominance toward dopamine dominance, its effect can be to erase the habits of learned helplessness. Stress and pain also leave their residue in the endorphin system, and the anti-opiates such as naloxone can relieve depression, improve memory, and restore disturbed pituitary functions, for example leading to the restoration of menstrual rhythms interrupted by stress or aging. The amazing speed with which young animals can solve problems is undoubtedly a reflection of their metabolic vigor, and it is probably partly because they haven't yet experienced the paralysis that can result from repeated or prolonged and inescapable stress


http://raypeat.com/articles/articles/in ... edge.shtml

IF Albert Hoffman never founded lsd, their would be no lysergic acid derivatives like bromocriptine, cabergoline, lisuride and many more.These medications are helping people from prolactin tumors, infertility, migraines, ect. You seem to be against anything that seems challenges the status quo. You love capitalism, promote paleo dieting, hate sugar, and against any use of psychedelic drugs. We all been through that route and its doesn't work. What are you some Nondenominational christian conservative tea bagger? :lol:
 

Asimov

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2013
Messages
162
Cabergoline, at the very least, had little to nothing to do with LSD discovery. The Italian scientists who discovered it were working on synthetic 6,8-dimethylergoline derivatives, ie: the exact opposite side of ergot derivatives as the lysergic acid group. LSD has as much to do with Cabergoline as aspirin has to do with GHB. Similar chemical structure can lead to WIDELY differing reactions when you're talking about organic chemistry. All you do by associating them together reveals your lack of knowledge on the subject and subsequently, the reason I shouldn't be wasting my time discussing matters with you that you don't understand.

For the rest of you people who can understand the science, LSD has a MUCH stronger track record of inducing schizophrenic like changes in the brain (learned helplessness, anxiety, depression) due to it's ability to mimic serotonin in the brain and bind to 5-HT (2A) serotonin receptors. I don't personally know of ANY science anywhere that indicates that LSD reduces helplessness. In fact, almost all of the common side-effects, even those accepted and agreed to be established LSD users, are very strongly indicative of it's pro-serotonin functions. Even the commonly accepted remedy to a 'bad high', Chlorpromazine indicates LSD's role as a serotonin mimic (Chlorpromazine is a powerful serotonin antagonist).

I guess it boils down to this: if you or anyone else truly thought LSD functioned as a dopamine agonist (or more generally speaking, if LSD were good for you), why wouldn't they take it every day after getting off work? Or hell, for that matter, why not take it before going to work? You can take bromocriptine before work no problem. Why not LSD?

Or more straight to the point; why in the hell would someone with no prior or post history of mental illness, castrate themselves upon their first dosage of LSD, but not upon their first dosage of ethyl-alcohol? The answer....I suspect....is because LSD does bad things inside you brain. But...ya know...I can't be sure.....
 
OP
J

jaa

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
1,035
Because of dosage, mental state, and setting?

I think most people who take a psychedelic dose of lsd are going to experience feelings of helplessness during the trip. Is there any evidence suggesting that this is a long term effect? My personal experience indicates otherwise, but that is worth very little. Also, I would be surprised if many people experienced learned helplessness on low doses of lsd, which is what Ray Peat is talking about.

Why don't I take LSD every day after work or before work? Well cost for one. It's an illegal drug that is difficult to obtain for two, and I don't know enough about it's long term effects which scares me for a third.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom