I have never heard of such a thing. What could possibly be the point? What do you mean by “liquid LSD”? I know people who dissolve windowpane or blotter in a glass of water as a way of sharing it among friends, but that is not any stronger than the hit they dissolved. If you had a solution of LSD of reasonable strength then it would be worth 10s of thousands of dollars if made into blotters.
Just as an aside, I once worked at a place that made radioactively “tagged” LSD of guaranteed strength and purity for research purposes. I was tempted to steal a little, but was afraid that knowing it was radioactive would flip me out while tripping,
I’ve seen liquid LSD. It’s expensive and comes in a tiny, tiny vial. One drop = one hit, roughly. Usually put on a sugar cube or something. POURING some on your hand and licking it up? I also can’t imagine such a thing except by someone who was amazingly stupid in a wide variety of ways. Yes, enough liquid LSD to POUR and LAP UP would be worth a hell of a lot of money, and wouldn’t be ANY fun at all to take. But then, some people are incredibly stupid.
How dangerous does something have to be before it is illegal? You could argue that nothing should be illegal, I suppose. I tend towards the Libertarian myself.
In your OP you said that it wasn’t dangerous. Now you are conceding that there are dangers. I can’t believe that you didn’t know about them all along. Those dangers, which you know full well are worse than anti-histamines, are the reason why it is illegal. Your question has been answered. If it’s a debate you want, this isn’t the place for it.
I know it’s terribly banal, but here it is again…
LSD is bad because “It’s a drug.” Presumably, it is actually bad because the DEA and others feel it carries a “high potential for abuse”. Now, I’m not sure exactly what that means-- but it certainly sounds bad, does it not?
Basically, some people successfully lobbied the government in a moralizing crusade directed at a stereotype and now we have laws. John Q. Public thought to himself, "Gee, would a prohibition of <insert drug here> affect me, personally? " and a majority of Johns came to the conclusion that the answer was “No.” After all, the laws were only affecting lazy hippy-types.
However, when such a question is applied to things like alcohol, tobacco, saturated fat, television, La-z-boys, etc. a lot of people come to the conclusion that “Those things make me happy!” See the prohibition of alcohol.
Things like the possibility of addiction and the inherent danger associated with drugs are mostly ad-hoc justifications. If you’re looking for logic and consistency, this is just another one of those issues wherein you’ll find neither.
I don’t wish to be snarky about this, but so often when this kind of question comes up, so much of the discussion focuses on scientific studies of what drug is safer or more dangerous than another, and all of that is, for the most part, beside the point. These decisions are not actually made by scientists and doctors, but the government through laws and bureaucratic actions.
Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act in 1970, and initially placed LSD on the list of Schedule I drugs – those that have a high likelihood of abuse, no currently accepted medical uses, lack of accepted safety protocols. The Department of Justice may review and update the list of schedules on a periodic basis. Why was LSD originally placed on Schedule I? Well, one congressman may have thought that the science was too iffy to justify the safety of LSD, and other may have hated hippies. So there may be a multitude of reasons, but in general, it seems that Congress determined that LSD had no medical uses, was prone to abuse, and there were no known protocols for safe use.
Additionally, the Controlled Substances Act makes reference to respecting treaties that are used to control narcotics and drugs. The 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances (a UN sponsored treaty) also lists LSD as a Schedule I drug.
It is possible under the law for the Dept of Justice to study whether a drug should be moved to another list. Needless to say, the process is rather stacked towards not allowing drugs to be moved further down the schedules, making them more widely available. Looking at the law, there isn’t really a measure or comparison of, this drug is better than this drug, therefore should be less controlled. The process appear to be an examination of one particular drug without context/comparison to other drugs.
So while there are certainly scientific questions here, probably best explanation of why LSD is illegal is that both Congress and the United Nations, through its member states, have established laws and treaties that treated LSD as a very dangerous drug. To be able to remove the drug from that list, there are fairly high legal barriers that must be demonstrated, and that hasn’t been done to the satisfaction of those who make the decisions. I haven’t been able to find that there has been any serious effort to move LSD from Schedule I, but I’m rather curious now and may keep looking.
Or we could blame those UN one-worlders. Yeah, that’s the ticket.
Soap is dangerous. Anything can be dangerous. When I said it wasn’t dangerous, I meant in the sense that the government needs to make it illegal to keep everyone safe. I don’t feel that it IS worse than anti-histamines, “danger” wise. Is there a more noticeable effect? Sure. But I don’t think that’s the same thing. In my experience, people just don’t tend to get into trouble on LSD. I think the “dangers” are vastly overstated. I think things like alcohol are far more “dangerous” and unhealthy, and yet we’re allowed to use those.
I think the government just doesn’t like the idea of people altering their state of mind like that. And that’s what I don’t get. (And yet I can wander around my house so staggering drunk that I can’t tell my couch from my toilet, and that’s just fine.) I don’t understand why they care.
My thinking, laid out simply, is this: the health/danger effects of LSD are not, IMO, enough to warrant the government making it illegal, especially in light of other things that are perfectly legal. Therefore I must conclude that it’s the actual drug effect that they don’t like, and I don’t understand why. I don’t get why being in an altered state of mind is considered such a taboo thing.
So your entire point is “it’s illegal because their are laws declaring it so”? That’s not particularly insightful.
I hate that that qualifies as “addictive”. The internet is psychologically addictive, but we don’t regulate who and can’t use it. I wish there were a clearer way of effectively differentiating between the two, to better inform people of its real effects.
That’s a gross oversimplification and not entirely accurate. Schizophrenia is partially a result of increased serotonin levels, and LSD triggers those same recepters, but LSD does not “mimic” anything. Schizophrenia occurs primarily in the frontal lobes and hippocampus, while LSD targets these areas, there is also some action in the upper registers of the brain stem.
Brewha: Regarding your spinal pain, I would guess similar to OpalCat had, that you are sitting in an uncomfortable posture without realizing it and your body is also more aware of any discomfort in the heightened state of awareness brought on by LSD. IIRC, serotonin is implicated in the regulation of your central nervous system which does involve the spine. What little I do know of the nervous system lies in the brain stem, not the spinal cord.
Because the government isn’t a “they”, it is a “we,” and we are nosy bastards with a habit of sticking our noses where they don’t belong.
Oh I’m with you there, trust me. I’m just saying that even insofar as pot can be considered “addictive”, LSD cannot. It isn’t even physically possible to trip every day, as far as I know. You have to wait until it’s out of your system before another dose will even “work”. In my experience with the people I know and have talked to, you’re far more likely to get sick of it if you do it regularly than you are to crave doing it even more. I was just trying to address the various things that people bring up for why X drug is [spooky voice]baaaaaad[/spooky voice] because it seems like most of those things don’t really apply in the case of LSD.
While it might seem a bit hypocritical for me to say this, I think that it might be a good idea that it is not readily available. In casual use, one may accidentally drink a bit too much, and the worst that usually happens is vomiting and hangovers. Too much to smoke and one goes to sleep after eating everything in the house. Too much LSD, or even the correct dosage, but in the wrong state of mind, and it is several very unpleasant hours. It’s happened to most people I know, including me. I’ve known several who’ve ended up in emergency rooms, injected with a tranquilizer. However, I can’t get terribly worked up about people choosing to use it, as long they aren’t also trying to drive. There are enough hazards on the roadways today without worrying them swerving to avoid the waltzing fluroescent mailboxes.
Well, occasionally there is a bit of trouble when one transforms back from being a hatrack or a piece of Chippendale furniture. My advice would be to focus on becoming nice plush stuffed furniture next time to avoid this.
If a microdrop is one hit, and costs, what, 10-20 bucks (I have no clue, just guessing), if you poured several ounces in your hand, regardless of the result, wouldn’t that cost thousands of dollars?
I’d like to slightly hijack here to address stoli’s questions:
Actually, these questions are not entirely hypothetical. Salvinorin-A, the psychoactive compound in salvia divinorum was only recently (1990s IIRC) discovered by modern society and is still unknown to many people (including some of the seasoned drug users I’ve met). The DEA has SD on their radar, but it’s still legal in 46 states in the USA. SD use as a drug is illegal in some countries, but seemingly unrestricted in other countries.
SD has been a popular topic of conversation among certain friends of mine in the past couple years. The experiences I’ve heard about are often bizarre and vary greatly. From the above Wiki link:
Also…
The raw SD leaf has low concentration of Salvinorin-A and is likewise not very potent. The leaves are often processed into a concentrated extract. One can buy or grow the raw leaves and smoke or eat them but the users I know prefer to smoke the concentrated extract which provides strong effects after only a couple or several hits depending on potency of the extract and how long one hold in the smoke.
AFAIK, SD is not known to provide any real physiological benefit or harm, but medical research on its effects are few and far between. The total loss of coordination associated with a SD trip is the primary danger. I read a couple stories on Erowid about people who took hits while driving (they thought it was pot) and wrecked. I think Delaware made SD illegal after some kid got killed in a car accident and SD was discovered on him, but I don’t recall details.
To address the question about how it’s marketed/approved: SD can be purchased online from manufacturers or from sellers on eBay and other sites. The only retail stores that I’ve seen that sold SD were little hippy shops that also sold drug accessories, incense, posters, psychedelic t-shirts, music, etc. From what I remember, the packaging labels do not indicate that the product inside is a mind altering drug, and there are no warning labels. The labels that I’ve seen said something like ‘<brand name> Salvia… Salvinorin A…20x (potency)…1 gram…Incense blah blah’ and that’s about it. I checked a retailer’s website just now and it had a small print disclaimer: “These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. This product is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. Consult a doctor before beginning an exercise program.” Maybe the packaging also has this small print; I don’t recall. I’ve never seen any advertisements for SD, but stores that sell the stuff will usually have a sticker or sign that indicates they have an SD inventory behind the counter. I guess it’s mostly a word of mouth or Internet phenomenon.
Salvia divinorum’s popularity seems to be limited by it’s high price (compared to pot), brief duration of effects, and probably it’s weirdness in general. Whether you love it or hate it or are indifferent, salvia is unique in it’s social and legal status.
I recall a couple old threads on the SDMB about salvia divinorum. You can search or ask me to link 'em if you like.
[/end hijack]
I have no comment on LSD. AFAIK, I’ve never even seen LSD since my druggie friends mostly stick to pot, shrooms, and of course the occasional SD.
It would be simpler to require all laws to have a reasonable expiration date (20-30 years sounds about right). The time required to periodically re-enact the actual worthwhile ones would have the side benefit of keeping the politicians busy and thus less likely to do additional damage.
Lots of people feel nothing from salvia, it has a very harsh, unpleasant taste and the trip is too intense for most people. Despite the fact that it’s legal, it’s not particularly pleasant, so there isn’t any pressing need to make it illegal.
I wouldn’t agree with you that SD is more expensive than pot. Per gram, a 10x extract is comparable with “cheap” pot (around these parts, it’s called schwag) and will stretch a lot further, as it takes less to get the user high.
Opal, if LSD were legal then people would spend destructively enormous amounts of time online popping virtual bubble wrap. And nobody wants that now, do they.
Or do they? :dubious:
A “hit” is typically 100micrograms, and I’ve seen it cost anywhere from $1-$5 for one hit. Most people I know took 2-4 hits for a given trip. In places where it’s harder to find it’s probably a lot more expensive. Plus, my information is 15-20 years old.
But yeah, enough to pour a puddle in your hand would be a lot of money and NO fun at all. You’d probably be more or less unconscious for days, is my guess. (Basically so lost in your own head that you no longer relate to your body until it wears off.) I’ve never known anyone to do anything so stupid. I did know of someone who took about 30 hits once, and tripped for about a week, supposedly, much of which time they had little or no connection with reality. That kind of misuse is pretty rare, though. (And someone who did it once would probably be preeeetty unlikely to do so again)
Like any drug, opinions and experiences regarding SD differ greatly among individual users. I’ve seen bandmates and friends mix some liquid flavor stuff (I forget what they call it) with salvia that supposedly makes it taste better. Also, most of them often mix the salvia with pot which supposedly makes the effect less intense and more pleasant and maybe even last longer. I wish I could be more directly informative, but my exposure to the drug culture is generally limited to being around other rock musicians.
I looked this up on a website that sells reputable SD: a gram of 20x costs $80 if ordered from that particular site (PM me if you want a link) and that probably doesn’t include shipping. I can only imagine the cost of ‘schwag’ varies a lot depending on a number of factors. What would $80 get ya, maybe 1/2 oz or 3/4 oz of schwag pot? Would that not last a bit longer than one gram of the quick tripping salvia? Maybe a gram of 10x or 20x salvia lasts longer than I thought…I dunno.
