Where do LSD images come from?

[QUOTE=Brain Wreck]
You were given a paper by Dr. Stanislav Grof, a pioneer and champion of LSD therapy and managed to take a single sentence out of context to conclude that Dr. Grof was saying LSD had no therapeutic potential? I have literally no words for this kind of aggressive ignorance. Had you read just a few more lines you might have been enlightened by the following:

[/QUOTE]

Brain Wreck - I didn’t deliberately take anything out of context. That was as far as I got. I’ll try to read the whole thing.

[QUOTE=Brain Wreck]
The broader sense of the word chemotherapy describes treatment that works purely by virtue of chemical activity.
[/QUOTE]

Ah. Thanks. I was wondering if it was something like that.

You’d think I’d know that, working in the medical profession and all. Then again, I work in surgery.

[QUOTE=Brain Wreck]
OK, I have to call bullshit at this point. You have posted exactly one cite (well, not a proper cite, just your own recollection) of something you saw on 60 minutes this one time. And if you’ll pardon my saying, television journalism is not particularly known for its thoroughness, expertise, nor for its accuracy.

[/quote]

Well I’m sure you dismiss all of these out-of-hand, but these are just from a simple google search:

http://www.brown.edu/Student_Services/Health_Services/Health_Education/atod/od_lsd.htm

http://alcoholism.about.com/cs/lsd/f/lsd_faq04.htm

http://www.healthatoz.com/healthatoz/Atoz/common/standard/transform.jsp?requestURI=/healthatoz/Atoz/ency/lysergic_acid_diethylamide_lsd.jsp

http://nepenthes.lycaeum.org/Drugs/LSD/LSD.psych.html

Would you like more, or are you starting to get the picture? Let’s be clear - these cases are far from the majority, and usually after repeated use. (The cases of this happening after only one use appear to be quite rare). But it is a real and widely-known phenomenon.

Now contrast this to the utter absence of ANY support for the two claims made here: (1) that long-term effects are a “myth” and (2) that the APA has declared LSD to be completely safe.

[QUOTE=tdn]
I never said currently. I never implied it, or meant to. I thought it was clear from context that I meant before 1968.

[/quote]

Doctors used to prescribe Thalidomide. Does that mean it’s a good thing? There are tons of things that were tried in the past and rejected later. What’s the point?

Speaking of hallucinations, that “conversation” is a doozie.

And let me add one more thing. This whole “therapeutic use” of LSD is pretty much a red-herring. This thread wasn’t about clinically-controlled uses of small doses of LSD; it was about recreational use for “tripping out”.

[QUOTE=lowbrass]
Doctors used to prescribe Thalidomide. Does that mean it’s a good thing? There are tons of things that were tried in the past and rejected later. What’s the point?

Speaking of hallucinations, that “conversation” is a doozie.
[/QUOTE]

Doctors are prescribing Thalidomide again. It’s used in some cancer therapies.

Of course, Thalidomide is never given to women who are pregnant or might become pregnant. But that’s the case with many drugs used in that context.

Research is the key.

[QUOTE=Bridget Burke]
Doctors are prescribing Thalidomide again. It’s used in some cancer therapies.

Of course, Thalidomide is never given to women who are pregnant or might become pregnant. But that’s the case with many drugs used in that context.

Research is the key.
[/QUOTE]

Figures I would pick an example that doesn’t really work. :smack: Hopefully my point isn’t lost, though.

[QUOTE=lowbrass]
Now contrast this to the utter absence of ANY support for the two claims made here: (1) that long-term effects are a “myth”
[/QUOTE]

I’ll give actual peer-reviewed cites for both sides,

Relatively Safe:

Abstract

Causes Flashbacks:

Abstract

Causes Panic and Flashbacks:
Abstract

I can get more papers when I actually get home where I have all my logins for the indexes.

[QUOTE=lowbrass]
Doctors used to prescribe Thalidomide. Does that mean it’s a good thing? There are tons of things that were tried in the past and rejected later. What’s the point?
[/QUOTE]

The point I was trying to make was that at one point, both LSD and MDMA were experimented with in therapy. They no longer are. But they were considered safe enough to use in that particular situation.

I’m not sure why you’re trying to make it into a bigger point.

[QUOTE=lowbrass]
Speaking of hallucinations, that “conversation” is a doozie.
[/QUOTE]

You: My understanding is that ecstasy can cause brain injury as well. (Post 33)

Me: I’m sure that with prolonged irresponsible recreational use, that’s true. But in controlled dosages once or twice? Under a therapists supervision? They probably thought the risks were acceptable. (post 35)

You: No, I never heard that claim. The accounts of permanent damage after only one usage are with LSD, not with ecstasy. The long-term effects of ecstasy were after repeated usage, I believe. (post 37)

I can maybe see the truthiness of your post 37, but what’s your point? How did the topic suddenly jump back to LSD? The topic of conversation was MDMA.

[QUOTE=lowbrass]
Well I’m sure you dismiss all of these out-of-hand, but these are just from a simple google search:
[/quote]

“Simple” is the keyword. Are any of these peer-reviewed scientific journals? What are the credentials of the authors? Oh look, there’s “about.com”. There’s a university student health department. Not exactly compelling sources, many of them appear to be cut-and-paste jobs. And a number of them reference the discredited “chromosome breakage” propaganda as well. These are your sources, and you expect to be taken seriously?

[QUOTE=tdn]
The point I was trying to make was that at one point, both LSD and MDMA were experimented with in therapy. They no longer are. But they were considered safe enough to use in that particular situation.

I’m not sure why you’re trying to make it into a bigger point.

[/quote]

Fair enough. I guess I thought you were using that as some sort of argument that long-term effects never happen with recreational use. I don’t want to go back and try to reconstruct the whole argument, and this is becoming more contentious than I wanted, so I’ll just say that I don’t have any reason to disagree with that statement.

I don’t follow. You seemed to think I was claiming long-term effects could exist from ONE use of ecstasy, but I never said that. That was my point.

[QUOTE=lowbrass]
Fair enough. I guess I thought you were using that as some sort of argument that long-term effects never happen with recreational use.
[/QUOTE]

Ah. No, I never claimed that. I’ve met a few burnouts in my day. Scary.

It seems we had a serious breeakdown in communications.