Alcohol and tobacco are by far the biggest threat to human welfare of all addictive drugs

[tonni]

Long-term Effects of LSD on the Brain
According to the Cleveland Clinic, the exact effect of LSD on the brain remains unknown. But the drug is believed to affect your brain’s response to serotonin – a neurotransmitter that involves your emotions, moods and perceptions.3

While immediate LSD use causes a variety of disorienting, distorted and emotional effects, there are also some potentially troublesome longer-term effects of LSD abuse:

• Persistent psychosis – there are reports of lingering symptoms of psychosis (more below).
• Recurrent hallucinations – even after you’ve stopped taking the drug.

Some users report having mind-expanding, mystical experiences while they’re under the influence of LSD. However, because it’s impossible to control the type of experiences you’ll have, the length of your experience or your reactions to the drug – you cannot predict if you are likely to have terrifying hallucinations or pleasant ones. Even worse, these episodes may continue after you’ve stopped using LSD, interfering with your social and professional life and putting you at risk of anxiety, depression and suicide.

Persistent Psychosis
“Psychosis” is defined as a condition of dissociation from the real world.4 It is characterized by:

1. Hallucinations – or perceiving things that aren’t actually there.
2. Delusions – or false beliefs.

Those with a history of long-term LSD use may experience psychotic episodes similar to people who suffer from schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, borderline personality disorder and other serious mental conditions.

Even after quitting LSD, the drug-induced psychosis that may continue to persist can include:

• Radically disorganized thought patterns.
• Distortions of perceived reality.
• Dramatic mood swings.

Not everyone who uses hallucinogenic drugs experiences persistent psychosis, but it appears to still be a risk for some.

Whether these episodes occur regularly or happen only occasionally, they can be terrifying and profoundly disturbing. Persistent psychosis can make it difficult to hold down a job, maintain a normal social life and form lasting personal relationships. During a psychotic episode, you may suffer a serious or fatal injury if your delusional experiences drive you to take life-threatening risks.

Flashbacks vs. HPPD
LSD flashbacks are often the subject of jokes in the media. Psychedelic drugs were widely abused in the 1960s by those looking to achieve an expanded state of consciousness. Some psychiatrists even prescribed LSD to their patients on a therapeutic or experimental basis.

Today’s references to flashbacks frequently poke fun at these visionary explorations. But while some flashbacks may be amusing, colorful and even pleasant – hallucinogen persisting perception disorder (HPPD) can be a dangerous and frightening condition. While flashbacks are usually infrequent, reversible and harmless – episodes of HPPD can be:

• A long-term, chronic side effect of LSD use.
• Extremely disturbing.
• Recurrent, reappearing over and over again.
• Accompanied by dysphoria, or a sense of depression and malaise.
• Irreversible – despite avoiding hallucinogenic drugs.

Those things are taken into consideration when assessing the dangers of LSD, and it's still on the bottom. Mostly, it has no addictive properties. The only addiction risk is psychological, which is actually solved by the fact that LSD has less effect, the more you take it. There's also basically zero risk for overdose, you'd have to drink 3 liters or some ridiculous amount like that.

The main issue I see is that modern day humans have no way of placing "mystical" experiences in a proper context, that's why I think people freak out and get psychoses.

 

[Son of Jamin]

An important factor should be societal harm. Take for an example the usage of ecstasy, if you use too much or get dehydrated may not be very beneficial for your own well-being but there is little harm to society in general compared to the effects of alcohol on society.

 

[tonni]

If you compared 5 alcoholics to 5 heroin addicts, which group's behaviour would be more damaging to themselves and others?

Well of course it would be heroin, because it's a more damaging substance but alcohol is not far away on the ladder. On the "socially accepted" ladder, it's all the way at the top and heroin at the bottom. I think it's easier to get help for heroin addiction than for alcohol addiction, at least where I live, and people are more alert of people who use heroin.

The problem is the great divide between the damage of alcohol, and the acceptance and promotion of it.

 

[spin]

Perhaps we should wage war on tobacco and alcohol instead of illegal drugs...

or


perhaps we should not do something so incredibly stupid.

 

[nostradumbass]

Actually, the way most people look at drinking "in moderation", I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of them had some withdrawal symptoms. Take a hard drug "in moderation" is not an easy thing to do, it has certain risks associated with it and the correlation with violent (domestic and otherwise) behavior is still present.

How large of a percentage of people do you think drink in moderation?

Most, I'd say. The number of people who have a drink or 2 compared to addicts is not close. Nobody uses heroin or coke in moderation.

 

[TheTimeIsNotNow]

Its hilarious that certain people create a (somewhat true) stereotype of stoners being militant about defending their weed but if speak bad about booze you get those same people defending their beer to the death.

 

[TheTimeIsNotNow]

Most, I'd say. The number of people who have a drink or 2 compared to addicts is not close. Nobody uses heroin or coke in moderation.

Yes they do. Not everyone wakes up desperate for a line of coke. Plenty of people will take a bump if they're hitting the club on the weekend though.

edit; Not to mention people who go to music festivals , gigs, etc. 99% of those people leave that world behind as soon as the weekend ends.

 

[tonni]

Most, I'd say. The number of people who have a drink or 2 compared to addicts is not close. Nobody uses heroin or coke in moderation.

How about in between "a drink" and full on addiction? Do you think the majority of people who party, for example, drink in moderation? 1 or 2 glasses?

Again, alcohol is correlated heavily with violence everywhere, especially domestic violence. This is a serious problem and it's nearly completely ignored.

There are people who claim to use coke and even heroin in moderation (mostly coke users though).

 

[Neph]

This is a serious problem and it's nearly completely ignored.

Not in our country; the amount of campaigns etc. to educate about alcohol, especially in relation to domestic violence, is crazy. I don't know how well they work though because a drinking culture is so deeply ingrained in Australia it's unreal.

 

[tonni]

Its hilarious that certain people create a (somewhat true) stereotype of stoners being militant about defending their weed but if speak bad about booze you get those same people defending their beer to the death.

Hey! They can stop whenever they want, they just don't. Because.

 

[tonni]

Not in our country; the amount of campaigns etc. to educate about alcohol, especially in relation to domestic violence, is crazy. I don't know how well they work though because a drinking culture is so deeply ingrained in Australia it's unreal.

It's good you guys have this level of awareness but it's at the same time depressing that it's so prevalent.

 

[Son of Jamin]

I'm not arguing with any of that (though, I'd like a look at the study that makes that closing claim). Hell, I traded alcohol for weed as my end-of-day edge-duller, because it's very apparent that it's not as bad for me as booze.
All I am saying is that legally available substances causing more widespread harm than illegal substances is not surprising.

If you compared 5 alcoholics to 5 heroin addicts, which group's behaviour would be more damaging to themselves and others? And which group would be likely to have fewer individuals surviving to old age?

I think it is also important to highlight that when it comes to heroin, the road to heroin usage is generally paved with a severely troubled life.

If you have clean heroin and clean needles, the pressure on the body is not as bad as generally believed. I'm not claiming that it's something healthy but its effects is generally used for scaremongering. The problem for many heroin addicts are that they are not taking care of themselves, they use dirty instruments and dirty heroin and live on the streets.

A healthy person that lives a productive way could use heroin sporadic without it being very toxic.

 

[AtomicPanther]

Knowing the health risks, and the costs, why would anyone START smoking? One of those things I'll never understand.

 

[nostradumbass]

How about in between "a drink" and full on addiction? Do you think the majority of people who party, for example, drink in moderation? 1 or 2 glasses?

Again, alcohol is correlated heavily with violence everywhere, especially domestic violence. This is a serious problem and it's nearly completely ignored.

There are people who claim to use coke and even heroin in moderation (mostly coke users though).

How common are we pretending domestic violence is? You think that's most drinkers?

 

[Son of Jamin]

I think this article is valid in this thread as well:

Many People Use Drugs – But Here’s Why Most Don’t Become Addicts

Most drug users are ..?

In reality the likelihood of individuals without pre-existing vulnerabilities succumbing to long-term addiction is slim. Heroin and crack addicts are not a random sub set of England’s 3m current drug users.

Heads in the sand

Unfortunately the strong relationship between social distress and addiction is ignored by politicians and media commentators in favour of an assumption that addiction is a random risk driven by the power of the drug.

It does happen. But the atypical experience of the relatively small number of drug users from stable backgrounds who stumble into addiction and can legitimately attribute the chaos of their subsequent lives to this one event drowns out the experience of the overwhelming majority of addicts for whom social isolation, economic exclusion, criminality and fragile mental health preceded their drug use rather than being caused by it.

http://www.iflscience.com/health-an...e-drugs-here-s-why-most-don-t-become-addicts/

Basically, if you live a productive and stable life, it is a slim chance that you get hooked on heroin and sell your ass for a dollar in the streets...

 

[tonni]

How common are we pretending domestic violence is? You think that's most drinkers?

Pretending? It's not that most drinkers abuse their kids and spouse, but most domestic abusers consume alcohol. It's like most smokers don't get lung cancer, but most lung cancers are from smoking.

 

[Son of Jamin]

Pretending? It's not that most drinkers abuse their kids and spouse, but most domestic abusers consume alcohol. It's like most smokers don't get lung cancer, but most lung cancers are from smoking.

Alcohol is so detrimental to society:

In Sweden:

* 31% of all deaths in traffic are linked to alcohol
* 38% of all deaths from drowning are linked to alcohol
* 20% of all children grow up in a household where at least one parent drinks too much
* 60% of cases of violent crimes (like battery), alcohol was involved
* 55% of sex crimes, the attacker was under the influence of alcohol.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

The problem is the promotion of alcohol and the fact that it's associated with violence in public and at home. Objectively, it's a hard drug, but it's promoted like a harmless soft drug.

Did you know quitting alcohol without the help of a doctor is more dangerous than quitting heroin?

I find such statements fallacious.
It s all about dosage and common sense.

I drink a bottle of wine per week, don't beat up my wife and don't drink and drive.

Not comparable with drinking 3 bottles of wine in one sitting, beating up someone at the bar, driving home almost killing 5 people, and beating up the wife and kids at home. Wtf.

No, alcohol isn't a hard drug and many many things that are healthy in small quantities will kill you if you binge them.

Leave these binary conclusions to Murrcans. Aren't you from Yurrp ??

 

[tonni]

I find such statements fallacious.
It s all about dosage and common sense.

I drink a bottle of wine per week, don't beat up my wife and don't drink and drive.

Not comparable with drinking 3 bottles of wine in one sitting, beating up someone at the bar, driving home almost killing 5 people, and beating up the wife and kids at home. Wtf.

No, alcohol isn't a hard drug and many many things that are healthy in small quantities will kill you if you binge them.

Leave these binary conclusions to Murrcans. Aren't you from Yurrp ??

I love how you accuse me of binary conclusions, then go ahead and present a false dichotomy. It's not either you drink a bottle of wine a week in peace or be a homicidal maniac. It's about correlation and measuring the social damage.

 

[tonni]

Alcohol is so detrimental to society:

In Sweden:

* 31% of all deaths in traffic are linked to alcohol
* 38% of all deaths from drowning are linked to alcohol
* 20% of all children grow up in a household where at least one parent drinks too much
* 60% of cases of violent crimes (like battery), alcohol was involved
* 55% of sex crimes, the attacker was under the influence of alcohol.

Can you imagine this being any other substance, even legal?