2
   

Taking drugs

 
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Feb, 2007 07:43 pm
Such a drug is an impossibility.

If the drug had any effect whatsoever on the mental state of the user it would have damaging side effects, since it would produce mental states that would cause the him to percieve things differently.

The mental landscape of the user would alter to something that would not be in sync with reality, and this can cause problems.

Take cannabis, for example. There are no indicatons that this drug has any physical health risks (other than on the lungs if smoked), and there are no indications that it causes dependency.
What it does, on the other hand, is create a "vacuum" between the user and real life, it alters the mindset of the user enabeling a detatchment that is bound to catch up on the person

And if the hypothesized drug didn't alter the mental state there would be no point in taking it.
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Mon 5 Feb, 2007 10:22 pm
Well, yes -- you're right, there would be detrimental emotional effects from such a hypothetical drug as you point out. I only meant to say that the drug would not have some detrimental physical effects. Now it is potentially debatable whether or not an emotional change constitutes a physical change in the neural organization of one's brain, but let us disregard that possibility.

Cyracuz, your comments are inline with the types of questions I was intending to discuss. You basically are saying that to use the drug, you are necessarily causing yourself to be emotionally detached from other people in your life, and that this itself is a bad thing.

That depends on the extent that you use it though, doesn't it? Using it in a small amount does not have to cause significant detachment. Cigarette smokers use cigarettes a whole lot, yet they still have friends. There should be a balancing point with such a drug, at which point the negative social effects would be equal to the positive effects of the drug.

Mind you, I am referring to the net effects to the happiness of your life, weighted by the time that you are on the drug and off the drug. That is, if you are on the drug 40% of the time, then you would have to multiply your happiness on the drug by .4, and multiply your avg happiness off the drug by .6 This may not be the best heuristic measure but it'll do for a simple example of how one might compare.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Feb, 2007 03:48 pm
Stuh

Sorry for the late reply. Lately there are almost too many threads to keep track of...

But anyway, if the drug had no detrimental physical effects, and would not cause significant emotional and cognitive problems, I see no reason to not take the drug if one wanted to kick back.

But there is always the issue of psychological addiction. I think that the drug would be used as an escape every time the user felt the pressures of everyday life too strong. Then the threshold of what constitutes "too strong" would get gradually lower until the user would take the drug to relieve himself at even the slightest bump in the road.

Thing is, cannabis is such a drug as the one we're discussing, and from personal experience I can say that this is the way it would go. I smoked that shyt for a long time. I had a job, friends, girlfriend and a social life, and all that was no problem. But the drug made me weak. Not physically, but emotionally. I couldn't handle stress in the end, and if I was subjected to it I had to smoke or I'd become angry or just despair.

Now I don't smoke at all anymore, and my life is infinetly better for it.

And as for your 40% of the time vs 60%... Try eight years of 100% of my waking hours in a cloud of hashish smoke... :wink: In the end I was miserable, and I almost couldn't see it. I thought I was happy. Only now, no longer smoking, do I know how wrong I was.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Feb, 2007 04:16 pm
I want a new drug
One that wont make me sick
One that wont make me crash my car
Or make me feel three feet thick

I want a new drug
One that wont hurt my head
One that wont make my mouth too dry
Or make my eyes too red

One that wont make me nervous
Wondering what to do
One that makes me feel like I feel when Im with you
When Im alone with you

I want a new drug
One that wont spill
One that dont cost too much
Or come in a pill

I want a new drug
One that wont go away
One that wont keep me up all night
One that wont make me sleep all day

One that wont make me nervous
Wondering what to do
One that makes me feel like I feel when Im with you
When Im alone with you
Im alone with you baby

I want a new drug
One that does what it should
One that wont make me feel too bad
One that wont make me feel too good

I want a new drug
One with no doubt
One that wont make me talk too much
Or make my face break out

One that wont make me nervous
Wondering what to do
One that makes me feel like I feel when Im with you
When Im alone with you
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Feb, 2007 10:39 am
Yeah, you're right Cyracuz...Cannabis is pretty much the perfect drug. Seems to be a cure-all, too. I've definitely enjoyed the stuff in the past, but never allowed it to interfere with my life, so thanks for sharing your perspective.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Feb, 2007 01:23 pm
My pleasure Stuh.

Btw, I read once that the human brain has THC "receptors" ( for those who do not know, THC is the stuff in cannabis that makes you high), and unlike all other drugs, cannabis doesn't poison the body, like alcohol or amphetamine or whatever. Without these "receptors" in our brains the stuff would do nothing for us.

But I do not know if any of this is true. If anyone does know please speak up Smile
0 Replies
 
patiodog
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Feb, 2007 06:07 pm
from http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/2000-10/971305841.Ns.r.html

Quote:
MadSci Network: Neuroscience Query:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re: what are the purposes of THC receptors
Date: Wed Oct 11 15:07:14 2000
Posted By: Gabriel Vargas M.D.,Ph.D., Post-doc/Fellow, Neurosciences/Psychiatry
Area of science: Neuroscience
ID: 971245194.Ns
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message:


In answer to your questions in brief:
1. Yes THC receptors do exist in the brain and
2. They do have a purpose other than binding to THC, which is only
found in Marijuana.
What follows is a short discussion on this topic (modified from an online
site on the effects of Marijuana).


The THC or cannabinoid receptor is a typical member of the largest known
family of receptors: the G-protein-coupled receptors with their distinctive
pattern in which the receptor molecule spans the cell membrane seven
times.THC receptors are very abundant in the brain.

The Endogenous Cannabinoid System

For any drug for which there is a receptor, the logical question is, "Why
does this receptor exist?" The short answer is that there is probably an
endogenous agonist (that is, a compound that is naturally produced in the
brain) that acts on that receptor. The long answer begins with a search
for such compounds in the area of the body that produce the receptors and
ends with a determination of the natural function of those compounds. So
far, the search has yielded several endogenous compounds that bind
selectively to cannabinoid receptors. The best studied of them are
anandamide and arachidonyl glycerol. However, their physiological roles
are not yet known.

Anandamide

The first endogenous cannabinoid to be discovered was
arachidonylethanolamine, named anandamide from the Sanskrit word ananda,
meaning "bliss." Anandamide appears to have both central (in the brain) and
peripheral (in the rest of the body) effects. The precise neuroanatomical
localization of anandamide and its function are not yet known.

hope this helps,
gabriel vargas md/phd
References:

Abood ME, Martin BR. 1996. Molecular neurobiology of the cannabinoid
receptor. International Review of Neurobiology 39:197-221.

Calignano A, La Rana G. Giuffrida A, Piomelli D. 1998. Control of pain
initiation by endogenous cannabinoids. Nature 394:277-281.

Childers SR, Breivogel CS. 1998. Cannabis and endogenous cannabinoid
systems. Drug and Alcohol Dependence 51:173-187.

Devane WA, Hanus L, Breuer A, Pertwee RG, Stevenson LA, Griffing F. Gibson
D, Mandelbaum A, Etinger A, Mechoulam R. 1992. Isolation and structure of a
brain constituent that binds to the cannabinoid receptor. Science 258:
1946- 1949.

Dewey WL. 1986. Cannabinoid pharmacology. Pharmacology Review 38:151-178.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Feb, 2007 06:32 pm
Cool. Thanks patiodog. Smile
0 Replies
 
wraith313
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Feb, 2007 02:23 pm
The interesting thing about receptors are that if you block them for long enough, they quit working. What would probably happen is, the THC in the cannibis would act on the receptors, blocking out whatever was supposed to bind to it, and eventually one of two things would likely happen: those being that either the receptors would quit working (this commonly happens in the body...its one reason why they tell you not to use inhalers more than X times a day, it will block all the receptors and they will not work anymore), or they will just be blocked all the time. Thats probably why as person doesnt necessarily get hurt by smoking a lot, but they would probably get addicted in a way that they would have trouble being happy (sort of like the psychological addiction mentioned earlier) (that article ^ said that it was sort of like a "bliss" receptor) without smoking. When you quit, eventually the THC leaves your system and you go back to normal.

Just my take on it. I could be wrong, but based on what ive learned in my classes, that is probably the way it works.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Feb, 2007 06:00 pm
That might be so, wraith.

I know that other drugs can really mess up things. Amphetamine, for instance, destroys the body's dopamine production, and after using the drug long enough quitting becomes very hard, since the body doesn't produce dopamine anymore, so everything becomes dreary.

I do not know if the effects are irreversable though.
0 Replies
 
wraith313
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Feb, 2007 06:23 pm
I heard somewhere that EXTREME prolonged use can have permanent effects. But I believe the place I read that mentioned that the "extreme" being like, years and years of smoking every day multiple times a day. it was a pretty ridiculous number. I dont think they had studies backing that up, either.
0 Replies
 
Cyracuz
 
  1  
Reply Sun 18 Feb, 2007 06:41 pm
How about six years, every day, all day. Not several times a day, but one ongoing session that lasted from morning to evening.

That's what I did, but I quit, and now I'm fine.
0 Replies
 
coluber2001
 
  1  
Reply Tue 6 Mar, 2007 03:05 pm
An antidepressant doesn't neccessarily cause happiness; they simply end depression, allowing the person to feel the whole gamut of emotions.
0 Replies
 
rockpie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Mar, 2007 04:31 am
when my girlfriend was 15 she was taking coke, not regularly, but enough to have killed her. when i found out i was shocked and dissapointed, but i thank God that she is alive. drugs are bad. whether it's a cigarette or heroin. avoid it!
0 Replies
 
Xenoche
 
  1  
Reply Wed 7 Mar, 2007 08:53 pm
Would you be just as disapointed if she was using a vapourizor with marajuana instead of coke?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Taking drugs
  3. » Page 4
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 2.2 seconds on 12/28/2024 at 06:16:05