HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell)
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 02:57:55 GMT

jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger) writes:

>David Vessell writes:
>>> Why should we limit inquiry to a particular species?
>>
>> Because it's foolish to consider passing laws prohibiting rats from
>> snorting coke.
>
>Following this logic, let's ignore physics when designing cars; the
>vast majority of physics was performed on objects other than cars.

Well, you're being anal but I suppose you have a point.


>> That's what this whole argument is based in: how all this
>> theory, research, and real-life results is going to affect the legal
>> treatment of this stuff.
>
>No, that's some argument someone else is having.  I have taken no
>position on the matter.

And yet you have stepped right into the middle of it.  Now who's come in
late?  And the positions you *have* given are dubious indeed.


-- 
=========*davE*.....making the world safe for intelligent dance music.=========
               Andre Marrou -- Libertarian for President 1992
--(David Vessell)--(Bradley University Computing Services)-(dave@bradley.edu)--
From: ww1i+@andrew.cmu.edu (William Spaulding Wood)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: One pill makes you. . .
Date: 27 Jul 92 03:29:12 GMT
Organization: Freshman, H&SS general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Good to see that people still feel like Salvador Dali:
"I have never taken drugs,
Since I am the drug.
I don't talk about my hallucinations,
I evoke them.
Take me, I am the Drug.
Take me, I am hallucinogenic."

    ~wig, with more quotes than he could ever possibly use, although he
is trying
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,sci.med
From: phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel)
Subject: Re: What is the Health Risk from Smoking MJ?
Keywords: Smoking, Tobacco, Marijuana, Health
Organization: Cadence Design Systems
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:16:31 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.013619.11668@athena.cs.uga.edu> mcovingt@athena.cs.uga.edu (Michael A. Covington) writes:
>"Marijuana has never caused a death" is a factoid that I hear quoted
>often.  And I'm not inclined to believe it.  Hasn't even _one_ stoned
>driver ever been involved in a fatal car accident?

Actually, according to the PDR writeup on Marinol (Dronabinol -- synthetic
THC), two people are reported to have died and one person is reported to have
gone into a coma due to the consumption of marijuana products (I can't remember
whether they were all attributed to "Indian Hemp" or whether the deaths were
attributed to eating hashish -- I'm pretty sure it was eating, not smoking,
though that was involved).  I have no more info than that, and my PDR
(Physician's Desk Reference) is at home, so I can't elaborate.

As far as a stoned driver being involved in a fatal car accident, you have to
first show that the condition of the driver is what caused the accident.  So
far all the studies I know that have tested the blood of drivers in fatal
accidents, almost all the ones that have THC in their blood also have alcohol
in their blood.

Actual tests of the ability of people to drive under the influence of
marijuana are inconclusive.  Some people actually perform BETTER on simulator
and real car driving tests after having ingested marijuana.  Some people
do perform worse, but there is also a learning curve involved.  Also, most
people under the influence of marijuana KNOW they are under the influence and
adjust driving habits accordingly.

On the other hand, tests with alcohol show that people are impaired in their
driving ability even when they don't think they are (from 1 to 2 drinks before
being tested).  Alcohol is PROVABLY a much greater hazard for drivers than
marijuana.

But that's neither here nor there.  If someone is tired and falls asleep at
the wheel, you don't say that sleep caused his or her death, do you?

-Pete Zakel
 (phz@cadence.com or ..!uunet!cadence!phz)

		If at first you don't succeed,
		Destroy all evidence you even tried.                            


			    - Fahnestock's Rule for Failure
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,sci.psychology,talk.politics.drugs
From: jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger)
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Reply-To: jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger)
Organization: Ask Computer Systems Inc., Ingres Division, Alameda CA 94501
Distribution: usa
Date: 29 Jul 92 04:24:09 GMT


I wrote:
> There is a class of substances whose mere exposure leads to addiction.

David Vessell inquires:
> so WHAT IS IT

Pretty much what you'd guess.  For example, cocaine.  Surprise.

There's also an interesting subclass: substances that the organism
self administers.  This subclass is also pretty much what you'd guess,
e.g. cocaine also makes this list.  Anyone surprised?

The complement to this subclass is also interesting: substances whose
exposure leads to addiction but the organism doesn't self administer.

All relevant to evaluating potential for abuse.

-- Jon
--
Jon Krueger  jpk@ingres.com  
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: s7356911@deimos.ucc.umass.edu (DANIEL PROSSER)
Subject: Re: LSD - After effects
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Keywords: LSD, Acid, flashback, Ren & Stimpy, nipple clamps
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Distribution: na
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 16:36:00 GMT

In article <BrsuCG.7Jq@cs.dal.ca>, craig@ug.cs.dal.ca (Ryan Craig) writes...
> 
>Question:  Has anyone out there ever actually had a flash-back?  Better
>still, what exactly is a flash-back supposed to be like?........
			>|Ryan Craig
>+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

	Never had a flash-back; I was beginning to think the whole idea
was a bit of Anti-Drug hysteria.  Once when I was dreaming, I had a snippet
of a dream that might be considered one, though:  in the dream, one person was
trying to inject another with some unidentified drug when the hypo broke and
I was doused with the contents.  I immediately started getting intense 
geometric visuals, so intense that I woke up.  (Just my psyche playing again).
	The most prominent after-effect I got was an intensification of
the effects of other drugs like marijuana and alcohol.  In fact, shortly after
I got interested in LSD, I stopped smoking mj.  Probably because every time 
I smoked it (to relax) I got hyper and edgy.

Re: LSD vs. mushrooms
	I get the same visual stuff from both.  What differs is the
``background'' feelings.  With acid I'm anxious, with 'shrooms I get
happy and relaxed.

	"Where the hell is the population,
		All quiet for a generation,
	 What ever happened to the human race?
		Can't you see the enemy here is you?"
				1000 Homo DJs,'Apathy'
 dylyn (aka, d prosser) == S7356911@tethys.UCC.umass.edu
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: lamontg@milton.u.washington.edu (Lamont Granquist)
Subject: Re: Apologies
Organization: 'Operation: Mindcrime'
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:43:46 GMT

William Spaulding Wood <ww1i+@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
>It is my sincerest wish to appologize for my last posting.  I will not
>repeat it here, as it was bad enough the first time.  It did provide for
>a bit of a contreversy, which, while it was not the intent, was good, I
>suppose.  I retract the posting, and hope you can all regard it in
>humor, not malice.  I realize the endangerment of such a letter, to
>myself and the b.board, thank you for your time, and correspondence.

Well, since I doubt anyone would have responded with an offer to setup
a transaction (unless there are people dealing on the net to complete 
strangers that I'm not aware of [and the existance of people stupid enough to
sell on the net like this given all the paranoia, etc has yet to be
proven]...) I really doubt you could have done any harm.

p.s. its a "newsgroup" not a b.board -- calling it a b.board makes you smell
     like a newbie from micro-BBS land.  =)
 
-- 
Lamont Granquist  lamontg@u.washington.edu  (anon: ap.2187@cupid.sai.com)
University of Washington, Seattle.    Disc: if UW ever finds out what I post... 
alt.drugs FTP site: ftp.u.washington.edu[128.95.136.1] dir:/public/alt.drugs
               For quotes and other useless info see my .plan
From: bbehlen@soda.berkeley.edu (Vitamin B (Brian Behlendorf))
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: LSD - After effects
Date: 22 Jul 1992 08:15:24 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu
Keywords: LSD, Acid, flashback, Ren & Stimpy

In article <1992Jul22.050412.14481@u.washington.edu> gmarter@shelley.u.washington.edu (Guerren Marter) writes:
>   For my friends and myself, this has been accepted as normal - if its
>not, I'd be suprised.  If your friend has taken as often as you wrote that
>he had, I'm intrigued that this only exists in his peripheral vision - 
>usually after that much exposure, I've noted that tracers and small moving
>objects occur in straightforward vision also.
>
>  (i'm not too wacked here, am I?)


No, I was getting tracers tonight watching lights whizz by on the BART (SF's
subway system). I also get those weird corner-eye sightings, and if I look
at a blank wall I can see very faint color differences, much like looking
at the surface of a soap bubble.


	Brian
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:13390 talk.politics.drugs:5275 sci.psychology:3210
From: elg@elgamy.sccsi.com (Eric Lee Green)
Date: 22 Jul 92 16:17:55 CDT
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs,sci.psychology
Subject: Re: Reverse aversion response = instant addiction? (was Re: Partial Legalization
Distribution: world
Organization: Eric's Amiga 2000 @ Home

From article <1992Jul22.041317.2955@ddsw1.mcs.com>, by zane@ddsw1.mcs.com (Sameer Parekh):
>
>       [Information about reverse aversion response deleted]
>
>       _A Clockwork Orange_ anyone?

We already live in the world of "A Clockwork Orange". The only problem is
that we have been conditioned to not know it.

--
 Eric Lee Green  elg@elgamy.sccsi.com         Dodson Elementary
 (713) 437-6908  uunet!nuchat!elgamy!elg      Houston, TX
                "Kids are kids, no matter what"
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:13896 sci.med:14938
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 10:54:11 EDT
From: <DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,sci.med
Subject: Re: Cancer risk of marijuana
 <3BRmoB3w165w@hacktic.nl> <1992Jul30.204012.25770@Cadence.COM>

In article <1992Jul30.204012.25770@Cadence.COM>, phz@cadence.com (Pete Zakel)
says:
>
>In article <3BRmoB3w165w@hacktic.nl> bill@hacktic.nl (Bill Squire) writes:
>>Certainly smoking it causes cancer, but since it contains
>
>DAMMIT!  QUIT SAYING THAT!
>
>It is absolutely NOT certain that smoking marijuana causes cancer.  There
>has NEVER been a case of lung cancer that has been directly attributed to
>smoking marijuana, and there has NEVER been a study that shows any increase
>of incidence of lung cancer in marijuana smokers (as far as I know, anyway).

A 1988 summary of the evidence of the health effects of marijuana done
for the insurance industry found that although there is, as yet, no direct
evidence that marijuana is linked to lung cancer....
      1) Marijuana contains 50% more carcinogenic chemicals than high-tar
      tobacco cigarettes, including 70% more benzopyrene.
      2) There is evidence that marijuana smokers have increased rates of
      precancerous lesions in the lungs, such as basal cell hyperplasia.
      3) Marijuana smokers generally inhale more deeply and hold the smoke
      in their longs for a longer period of time.
      4) Marijuana smokers have been found to have impaired lung function
      like that found in tobacco smokers.
      5) Marijuana smokers have increased incidence of respiratory diseases
      such as bronchitis, sinusitis, and pharayngitis.
      6) Marijuana increases the heart rate and decreases the strength of the
      heart's contractions, and thus may play a contributing role in
      heart attacks among those at risk.

Despite the lack of direct evidence, I think it's safe to say that chronic
marijuana use can cause serious health problems.  The lack of direct
evidence is probably due more to the lack of chronic marijuana users,
rather than the lack of a link between marijuana and health.

The above summary can be found in "Medical Underwriting" compiled by Richard
Bailey.

>On the other hand, there are a MYRIAD of studies that show smoking tobacco
>increases one's risk of lung cancer, despite what the tobacco industry says.
>
>If anyone knows of ANY verified study linking marijuana with lung cancer,
>please post it as I would be VERY interested.  I don't believe one exists.
>
>-Pete Zakel
> (phz@cadence.com or ..!uunet!cadence!phz)
>
>Self Test for Paranoia:
>        You know you have it when you can't think of anything that's
>        your own fault.
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: bprofane@netcom.com (Gert Niewahr)
Subject: Re: Johnny Marijuana Seed
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 09:01:02 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: international

In article <mtymp15.712424397@epx.cis.umn.edu> mtymp15@epx.cis.umn.edu (David Hutton) writes:
>We have been doing this for some time (re planting seeds all over) and the 
>fun of it is doing it with style,
>
>i.e...... plant them in public spots (post offices, banks, large estates,
>politicians lawns...) and then take pictures before you harvest to use
>as blackmail.

One night I had a wild dream where I was the head of a clandestine
cabal to saturate the US with wild marijuana.  It had something to
do with smuggling a couple of metric tons of fiendishly fertile
hybrid seed in on a surplus Argentinian submarine and then using
one of those old fire-fighting B-25's to saturate huge swathes of
wilderness with seed.  It ended with me slashing open the last sack
of seed with a Bowie knife and shoveling great handfuls out as
we did a low pass over the Mall in Washington D.C.  Long pan of
seed raining down on the Capitol, Washington Monument, the White
House...

Make a great Cheech & Chong film...
From: jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Making Hashish...
Date: 22 Jul 92 16:17:55 GMT
Organization: MIT Department of Mathematics, Cambridge, MA

In article <1992Jul20.103856.11271@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> bx461@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Leo J. Mauler) writes:
>
>I recall a post awhile back mentioning that extracting the THC 
>from marijuana, resulted in hashish.  I also recall the same 
>poster mentioning that hasish could also be produced from an 
>exceptionally large amount of alfalfa.
> 
>Well, I happen to have a few farming connections (no drug 
>connections, but I'm friends with a lot of legit farmers) and 
>getting a couple tons of alfalfa wouldn't be too difficult, 
>and might even be acquired cheaply.  What I'd love to know is: 
>is it true that you can make hashish from a large amount of 
>alfalfa?  Times aren't too great for those family farmers, and 
>being able to help them out legitimately would be a great 
>thing to do.

I think your reality check just bounced.  Why do you think that hashish
could be produced from exceptionally large amounts of alfalfa, except by
selling the alfalfa and buying hash?  In any event, turning alfalfa into
hash and selling it would not count as "legitimately" helping these farmers.
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: sean@ms.uky.edu (Sean Casey)
Subject: Re: Floaters (was Re: LSD - After effects)
Organization: The Leaning Tower of Patterson Office @ The Univ. of KY
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 08:05:55 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.002240.10082@stiatl.salestech.com> ges@stiatl.salestech.com (Gerald Sullivan) writes:
:>or other crud floating around in your cornea.  I see them whenever I
:>decide to pay attention.  They can be irritating.  My girlfriend had a
:
:This is not correct, "floaters" are in the vitrious humor, the liquid
:that fills your eyes. They are not in the cornea, the corneea is the outermost
:clear part of your eye.

Floaters can also be scratches in your cornea. I've had "floaters"
that didn't change shape or position for a week. They certainly
wouldn't do that if they were free floating.

Sean
-- 
                  |``Wind, waves, etc. are breakdowns in the face of the
Sean Casey        | commitment to getting from here to there. But they are the
sean@s.ms.uky.edu | conditions for sailing -- not something to be gotten rid
U of KY, Lexington| of, but something to be danced with.''
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,sci.med,talk.politics.misc,talk.politics.drugs
From: al037@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dave Polewka)
Subject: Re: Definition of an addict.
Reply-To: al037@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Dave Polewka)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 22:24:16 GMT


In a previous article, RR04@bunny.gte.com (Rob Robertson) says:

>"There is nothing new under the sun..."

Every day is a new day.


-- 
=======================
"Endeavor to persevere"
=======================
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: n9020351@henson.cc.wwu.edu (James Douglas Del-Vecchio)
Subject: Re: Morphine
Organization: Western Washington University
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 18:44:25 GMT

moon!cyberden!impmat@well.sf.ca.us writes:

>I took a four mg. tablet of morphine before seeing my urologist for a 
>testicular examination.   As he wae massaging my testicles in search og 
>cancerous growths the full effect of the morphine kicked in and I began 
>to feel nauseus and light-headed.  I conveyed this to my Doctor who 
>promptly had me lie down and elevate my legs as to improve circulation to 
>my brain.  He apparantly thought that the examination was so painful that 
>it had caused me to almost pass out.  Little did he know that I was in no 
>pain at all and simply fucked up on Morphine.  And who says a visit to 
>the doctor is no fun?

Four mgs of morphine made you nauseus and light-headed?   First, that
seems like an awfuly small amount of it.  Second, I wasn't aware that
it came in tablets like that.  Third, isn't morphine generaly used as
suppositories or im injection, as ~85%, is destroyed in the stomach?

Dilaudid (hydromorphone) comes in 4 mg tablets, and 4 mgs of Dilaudid 
could be a pretty good amount.   Could it have been something else?

Jim Del Vecchio
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: mason@dante.uucp (Mason Jones)
Subject: LSD->Insanity (ooh, scary!)
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 23:36:39 GMT
Organization: Charnel House Prod.


A short while ago someone brought up the old "take <n> hits of LSD
and you're legally insane" story, but I don't recall any conclusions
being reached.  Well, that old chestnut came up again during a
conversation, and I thought I'd try again.

First off, is there any such statute sitting around in some state's
lawbooks (probably CA's)?

If so, can anyone dig it up?  Or is there some other similar idea which
might have been mutated into the above story?  Or, is it pure bullshit
which has spread out of control?

Friends of ours from all over the country all have heard the same
story, though the number <n> changes from person to person.  If it's
bullshit, it sure has spread well.


  VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
             Mason Jones           Charnel House Productions
             P.O. Box 170277, San Francisco 94117-0277 U.S.A.
   ...{uunet,sun}!hoptoad!dante!mason   or   dante!mason@hop.toad.com
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: drk20509@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (mighty odin)
Subject: God-Endorsed Drugs
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 19:27:38 GMT

	Humor me and pretend that psychedelic substances are typically
not socially detrimental except for maybe making one a better person 
rather than a better citizen. I know yew must humor me because it is
obviouse by laws that psychedelics cannot be considered humane or to
have any beneficial use. Now pretend that I make use of these theoretical
consciouness tools. Yew must pretend because just because I pay taxes, vote,
can have kids and may be obliged to die for my country, does not imply
that I have the wisdom nor right to manage mine own consciousness. So in
this theoretical litt'l world of ours, let us define a `psychoactive drug'
as a `substance that when taken by a subject causes the subject to experience
profound experiences and/or changes either psychological, philosophical, or
spiritual, or any combination thereof.' Now, say I, back in this real world
(we must have been technically insane to have been conceptualizing that 
non-consensual reality there) walk ye into any catholic Churche and see
ye-selves, the many persons taking psychoactive drugs on the tips of their
tongues. And I aske of yew, what be the difference?
- the annointed dwk

---
its not like you just trip and you see God! That usually takes until the 
second or third time...
---
Man - the Animal That Simulates Realty and Believes His Simulation
			-JCLilly; Simulations of God
---
end transmission
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:13909 sci.med:14979
From: ppennane@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Petrus Pennanen)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,sci.med
Subject: Re: Cancer risk of marijuana
Date: 31 Jul 92 19:40:56 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

In article <92213.141236DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu> DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>Thanks for your sarcasm.  Now maybe you would care to offer some evidence
>(maybe a summary of a published article?) which shows that high use of
>marijuana among Jamaicans controlling for other factors, is not related
>to health problems.

According to The Emperor Wears No Clothes by Jack Herer, a study was
done in 1981 by Ungerlieder and Shaeffer from UCLA (sorry I don't have a
better reference) where no brain differences were found between
non-smokers and members of the Coptic religion who had been smoking 16 huge
spliffs (one considered equal to 5 joints) a day for 10 years.

Another study cited is "Ganja in Jamaica - A Medical Anthropological
Study of Chronic Marijuana Use" by Vera Rubin and Lambros Comitas (1975,
Mouton&Co, Hague; Paris/Anchor Books, NY). No difference was found in
plasma testosterone, total nutrion or intelligence test scores between
users and non-users. "Users in our matched pair sample smoked marijuana
in addition to as many tobacco cigarettes as did their partners. Yet
their airways were, if anything, a bit healthier than their matches."
"We must tentatively conclude either that marijuana has no harmful
effects on such passages or that it actually offers some slight
protection against the harmful effects of tobacco smoke. Only further
research will clarify which, if either, is the cause."
--
Petrus.Pennanen@helsinki.fi
From: u8951608@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: RFD: Recipe FAQ
Date: 23 Jul 92 04:52:59 GMT
Organization: University of New South Wales

In article <1992Jul22.053930.16847@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com>, billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
> feinstei@vax.sonoma.edu writes:
> : I was wondering if there is any interest in a FAQ containing recipes 
> : appropriate for this group... Any comments?
> : 
> : Josh 
> 
> It depends. Are the recipes real syntheses, or ones from such garbage
> publications as the "Anarchist Cookbook"?
> 
Presumably syntheses which have at least a slight chance of working
outside the strychnine universe.
Seriously, I am available for consultation concerning chemistry,
and I am always willing to discuss it.
I doubt that a recipe FAQ could be of much use, because for those
who wish and are capable of performing wicked illegal acts of 
synthesis successfully, finding a recipe is usually not the hard part.
However, in the case of more low-tech operations, such as solvent
and alkaloid extracion, a FAQ might be more appropriate.

Jeremy
jeremy@rsc3.anu.edu.au
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs