HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bagg@ellis.uchicago.edu (matthew john baggott)
Subject: Re: DMT Questions
Reply-To: bagg@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 19:50:13 GMT

With respect to orally activating DMT with an MAOI,
Dennis McKenna has this to say in his '84 review article in J. Psych.
Drugs 16(4):

"The potentiation of the behavioral and pharmacological effects of
tryptamine derivatives by MAOIs has been investigated, although
the specific question of the oral potentiation of DMT and other parenterally-
active derivates has apparently not been investigated.  The effects
of DMT in human volunteers was assessed before and 3 days after treatment
with the MAOI iproniazid (Sai-Halasz 1963). Patients receiving DMT
at a reduced dose following the iproniazid treatment experienced
none of the visual illusions or disturbances of time and space perception
that typify the symptoms of the drug.  They reported only a feeling of
"strangeness."  Patients receiving a dose equivalent to that prior
to iproniazid had a two-phase response.  The first stage was similar
to the usual DMT effects, but less pronounced: illusions and hallucinations
were present but less colorful and only manifested themselves with the
eyes closed.  The second phase was characterized by a persistent feeling
of "strangeness" to which the patients often reacted negatively or 
indifferently.  Based on these trials, Sai-Halasz (1963) speculated
that the reduced effects may have been due to the higher 5-HT
concentration in the brain due to MAO inhibition, thus mitigating the
5-HT blocking effects of DMT.  This speculation was also supported
by the observation that prior administration of 1-methyl-d-lysergic acid
butanolamide, a powerful serotonin antagonist, greatly exacerbated
the psychotomimetic effects of DMT (Sai-Halasz 1962)."

So, it would appear that the answer to question 6 hasn't been established.
However, some studies (mentioned above) seem to have been done demonstrating 
an interaction between MAOIs and DMT.

Jeremy handled most of those questions better than I could, so I
don't have much else to add. I doubt there have been any deaths
attributable to DMT use.  Also, I don't recall endogenous DMT in humans
and Dennis doesn't mention it in his review article so it is either
recent (post 1984) knowledge or it is a misprint by the poster or
publisher and should refer to a related tryptamine.  Or maybe it's
another revalation from the self-constructing machine elves.

    --M@
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: ap.7630@cupid.sai.com (Anonymous)
Subject: [anonymous] Caffeine question
Originator: lamontg@hardy.u.washington.edu
Keywords: anonymous
Reply-To: ap.7630@cupid.sai.com
Organization: Somewhere
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 01:40:20 GMT


I have read that caffeine redcues cerebral blood flow. What are
the short term consequences of this? What does it mean to the 
function of the brain?

Thank you.

-- 
To post anonymously to alt.drugs send a message to ap.4151@cupid.sai.com.
All lines after a line containing only "--" will be stripped.
Remember:  These articles are anonymous, but not secure. 
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: ppennane@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Petrus Pennanen)
Subject: LSD and alcoholism
Organization: University of Helsinki
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 09:53:17 GMT

In article <1992Dec15.035011.22594@u.washington.edu> lamontg@stein.u.washington.edu (Lamont Granquist) writes:
>PTSD is probably better treated with MAOIs.  And Solomon Snyder wrote that
>the LSD + Alcoholism issue had been layed to rest as not producing any more
>efficacy -- no citation, but I tend to trust him.

What does this mean? Sure, every therapeutic use of psychedelics has
been almost laid to rest for a long time now, but it doesn't say much
about their actual efficacy if used right. With a good setting and
positive expectations some of those alcoholics should get a plus-four or a
near plus-four magical experience if given a large dose of acid, which would
make them enjoy life and stop drinking. And as far as I remember this 
actually happened in the studies done in the sixties. Now they could give them
some ecstasy too (when they're sober of course). 

I trust Solomon too - the issue had been laid to rest inefficacy given
as the reason, but I think it will surface again.
 
Petrus
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: petersen@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Jim Petersen)
Subject: Re: LSD and alcoholics posting on usenet
Followup-To: alt.drugs
Organization: Chicago IL
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 12:04:26 GMT

In article <1992Dec27.012019.1@pomona.claremont.edu>,
cblanc@pomona.claremont.edu (Muffavore) wrote:
> 
> > What does this mean? Sure, every therapeutic use of psychedelics has
> > been almost laid to rest for a long time now, but it doesn't say much
> > about their actual efficacy if used right. With a good setting and
> > positive expectations some of those alcoholics should get a plus-four or a
> > near plus-four magical experience if given a large dose of acid, which would
> > make them enjoy life and stop drinking. And as far as I remember this 
> > actually happened in the studies done in the sixties. Now they could give them
> > some ecstasy too (when they're sober of course). 
> 
> 	You're forgetting that alcoholism is a disease, whether a mental or
> physiological addiction...having a good experience isn't going to affect the
> alcoholic's drinking -- he will still need alcohol to function.
> 

Well, certainly one good experience isn't going to make someone
suddenly wake up and never drink again. But it can be a powerful
start just to realize there's something else 'out there'. One of
the keys to AA is acceptance of a 'higher power'. This is much
easier when one has experienced the higher power directly through
LSD or MDMA.

I've been through alcoholic-related family and group sessions, and
I think MDMA properly administered might have been a great boon for
at least some of the people involved. And I'm sure it wouldn't have
done anyone any harm.

__________________________________________________________________________
Jim Petersen         petersen@casbah.acns.nwu.edu          jp@darkstar.com

                If mercy's in business I wish it for you-        
             More than just ashes when your dreams come true.
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: rodney@cabot.balltown.cma.com (Rodney Peck)
Subject: killfile for alt.drugs... yipes!
Organization: Balltown Offsite
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 22:53:55 GMT


I just noticed that the killfile in gnus for alt.drugs is called 
  "alt.drugs.KILL"!

Those war on drugs people sure do get around.

Rodney
From: tonya@csa2.lbl.gov (TONYA PUONCEY)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: smoke
Date: 22 Dec 1992 13:21 PST
Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory - Berkeley, CA, USA
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.254.197
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

Hey man....
just wondering how bad crack is for your lungs.  I know that sometimes thos
screens people seem to favor in the city are pretty bad... and they
oxidize, adding to the malodorous flavor...   But how bout at a bottom
line?  Is it way way way way worse than cigarettes, and how bout pot
while we're at it?  Also, crack through an aluminum pipe, will that
have some particles oxidize and burn me up inside?
Figure smoking a nickel to a twenty a week of highly bastardized shit rocks...
so no I don't freebase 90% coke anymore, adding to the uncertainty... 
but I just need a ballpark figure.
Thanks all you MD hacker smokers out there!


Oh try me out I love you sweet leaf


-tc
From: j1moody@darwin.cc.nd.edu (Joe Moody)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: A question. . .
Date: 28 Dec 92 21:31:28 GMT
Followup-To: alt.drugs
Organization: University of Notre Dame

In a country where instant gratification is such a high demand, 
why has the national pass time of other countries--the smoking of
opium--not
become popular here?
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:20162 alt.folklore.urban:31930
From: un040367@wvnvms.wvnet.edu
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: UL: Monumental LSD overdose taken (was: Re: Brands of LSD)
Date: 23 Dec 92 01:37:36 GMT
Organization: West Virginia Network for Educational Telecomputing

In article <1h7v1gINN4nm@hpscit.sc.hp.com>, dave@hpdstma.ptp.hp.com (Dave Waller) writes:
> In article <1992Dec20.052918.21974@galois.mit.edu>, jbaez@riesz.mit.edu (John C. Baez) writes:
> |> I think we are gradually getting the point: anything, in sufficient
> |> quantities or administered in a sufficiently silly manner, can be
> |> lethal.  Even neutrinos (hint: supernovae emit lots of neutrinos).  
> 
> Uhhhh, I don't think so. Better check your references again about the
> properties of neutrinos.

Maybe if you lined up 10^9 supernovae at once, and filtered out
all the other radiation somehow, and then irradiated someone
with the neutrinos such that a sufficient number interacted
with their matter...

jeremy
From: bz269@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (James D. Del Vecchio)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: legalization in Britian
Date: 29 Dec 1992 02:14:15 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: bz269@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (James D. Del Vecchio)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, homer@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Homer Smith) says:

>
>     I just saw a brilliant show on 60 minutes about the
>relegalization of heroin and cocaine in Britain.  Apparently

	Brilliant because you agreed with it?  I saw the show,
and I was glad to see the subject, but there was nothing new
or brilliant about it.  What was different was the segment may
have be
considerd poor taste 5 years ago.


>     In fact they have to take weekly urines test to prove that 
>they ARE still doing the drug and not selling it to others for
>a profit.
	I think that was an initial urine test to make sure they
are on drugs to start with.

>     With the drug free and pure, the health of these people 
>climbed back to normal levels, a vast majority of them immediately
>stopped any criminal activity they were involved in to support their
>habit, and the drug dealing in those areas went to 0 because there
>was no market for it.
> 
>     The number of addicts dropped by 300 percent, because there

	You mean 75%?	%^)	
>     The drugs are provided through drug stores, often as heroin or
>cocaine injected into a cigarette.  The addict provides the cigs,
>the drug store provides the drugs free.

	The store provides the drugs for a charge, and for some
of the addicts, the taxpayer picked up the tab.  None of it was
free.
>state run operation.  The quality control is excellent, nay perfect,
>and the addicts are all known and can be tracked, and many of them
>cut back on their own doses willfully after a time.

	A more common situation, I'd bet, is the doses purchaced 
stays the same and the surplus is sold.


>      He said that 50 percent of addicts get off of drugs by
>themselves within the 10 years of start of addiction, and this
>program makes sure they stay alive, healthy and productive.  The
>remainder stay addicted, but they too stay alive, healthy and
>productive.

	Or alive, healthy, and on welfare. 

> 
>     Drugs and marijhuana are not illegal because the vast majority
>of Americans believe that they should be so, they are illegal because
>a few jokers passed the laws through congress with the promise
>of kickbacks to the law makers.  

That plus the vast majority of Americans believe the they should be
so.
>     Homer

Jim D
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: nobody@cupid.sai.com (Anonymous)
Subject: [anonymous] yet another damn test 
Originator: lamontg@hardy.u.washington.edu
Keywords: anonymous
Reply-To: nobody@cupid.sai.com
Organization: Somewhere
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 01:22:58 GMT


test

-- 
To post anonymously to alt.drugs send a message to ap.4151@cupid.sai.com.
All lines after a line containing only "--" will be stripped.
Remember:  These articles are anonymous, but not secure. 
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,alt.folklore.urban
From: wisp@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Wisp)
Subject: Re: Life (death) imitates usenet - man dies from LSD abuse.
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Warwick University, England
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 12:16:20 GMT

In article <1992Dec22.012725.22100@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
>wisp@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Wisp) writes:
>
>: To sum up, no-one is suggesting that LSD outright killed this guy, by
>: direct toxic effects. Merely that it contributed to the death, in much the
>: same way that alcohol is blamed (quite rightly) for deaths in road
>: accidents when one party has been drinking. The cause of death may be massive
>: trauma, or fire, but it wouldn't have happened (probably) without the alcohol
>: in the driver's bloodstream (for example).
>
>From what was quoted - it looked very much like the doctor was saying that
>lsd caused the death. Note the "alcohol could increase the chance of death
>from lsd" or similar statement that was made.
>
>That is where I disagree. The statement implies that the lsd is toxic, and
>that the toxicity increases with use of alcohol.
>

That's how *you* take it. LSD is not toxic, but its effects can be very
frightening, or lead to dangerous behaviour. Both of those can cause death,
and are more likely to in the presence of alcohol, by the mechanisms described
in my last post (and others, no doubt).

You don't need to be saying LSD is toxic when you say it can cause death. Is a
parachute toxic? Or a mountain? There are behaviours that increase the
likelyhood of death, without any direct toxic effects, and it's entirely
possible that's what the doctor in the case was talking about. The
commonest example of that situation, of course, is drunk driving...

The Wisp. [Alpha Delta Mike Foxtrots abound...]
From: bowman@reed.edu (BoBolicious)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: query re: drugs and us security clearances -
Date: 31 Dec 92 20:59:39 GMT
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR

In article <1hvlbtINNblb@flash.pax.tpa.com.au> anon.230@pax.tpa.com.au writes:
>        Anyone care to remark on the effects of a single relatively
>recent experience with LSD for someone about to approach getting
>a clearance? No history of abuse/addiction, just a single experiment.
>Is it best to come clean or attempt to pull off a short term memory
>deficit?

Don't try to come clean.  They would probably let pot slide, but anything
beyond that they'll probably hose you.

...still glad they didn't make me get a clearance a few years ago...
bobo              In seeking the unattainable,
bowman@reed.edu            simplicity only gets in the way.
Eternal nothingness is fine if you happen to be dressed for it. - Woody
From: plord@pioneer.uspto.gov (Paul Lord)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Cloves - Where else would I ask?
Date: 23 Dec 1992 13:32:39 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu


Since I can't find a smoking/nicotine related froup:

Can anyone clarify a few questions about clove cigarettes for me?
I have heard the following unsubstantiated rumors:
* Cloves contain no nicotine
* Cloves make your lungs bleed
* The resin in cloves crystallizes in your lungs

Also, What's the deal with cigarette classification?  The Djarum unfiltered
I used to like were class B, the Sampoerna X-tra filters I smoke now are
class A.  

Paul
No comment on why I learned how to inhale smoke :)
From: un040367@wvnvms.wvnet.edu
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Cats and LSD
Date: 30 Dec 92 13:47:06 GMT
Organization: West Virginia Network for Educational Telecomputing

In article <1992Dec30.020644.203434@uctvax.uct.ac.za>, brrian04@uctvax.uct.ac.za writes:
> As far as I know wild animals (cats included) eat hallucinogenic plants on
> purpose.  Can anyone confirm or refute this?

I read somewhere in a reputable source (which I cannot possibly recall)
that hallucinogens are distinguished from other classes of recreational
pharmaceuticals (e.g. uppers and downers) by the fact that given a 
button and a needle which delivers the drug, an animal (e.g. monkey)
will _not_ repeatedly self administer a hallucinogen.

Jeremy
jeremy@rsc3.anu.edu.au (not this address)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: mjharris@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mike Harris)
Subject: Re: Some anonymous posts
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 92 21:34:44 GMT


>: -------
>: I am wondering if anyone else has tried the rice cake method of growing
>: mushrooms and has had similar problems to mine (and hopefully knows
>: what to do about it).  I followed the directions given in an article
>: several months ago. (mid-August) and was quite excited when 4 out of 5
>: jars had uncontaminated white fluffy growth permeating the medium.
>: (several weeks later)  Unfortunately, there has never been anything
>: resembling stringy fibers which was the signal to give the jars some
>: light.  I am wondering if I have done something obviously wrong, or if
>: this method isn't as foolproof as using different mediums for different
>: stages.  I still have 2 jars that are uncontaminated; should I consider
>: transferring the culture to a different medium?  Should I give the jars
>: light even though I don't see the stringy growth? Should I give up and
>: go back to having little success at buying mushrooms from someone
>: else?

>Check the instructions again. There may be some temperature or humidity
>requirements that you are not fulfilling.

>Bill

Also I think you could say that this whole process sounds much simpler
than it really is. I've heard nothing about growing shooms more than the
comments about how hard it is to get decent results - or even results at
all. When I read that faq I kind of was skeptical. He makes it sound so
easy. Must have a white thumb about these things. Me - I can't even grow
weeds too good. I'm curious. How many others have had sucess with the rice
cake method or for that matter any other method?


--
>>> For private correspondance, finger for my uuencoded pgp public key <<< 
InterNet: mikeh@tenet.edu

Newsgroups: alt.drugs,alt.folklore.urban
From: an3886@anon.penet.fi
Subject: Qat, kat, Gat, Gaat
Organization: Anonymous contact service
X-Anonymously-To: alt.drugs
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 13:28:26 GMT

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be anonymized,
and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: mjharris@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mike Harris)
Subject: Re: LSD and alcoholism
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 92 05:24:43 GMT

jah@mits.mdata.fi (Jani A. Heinonen) writes:

>mjharris@nyx.cs.du.edu (Mike Harris) writes:

>>True but it might make them discover it (life) for the first time and stop
>>fucking with it in stupid ways.

>   Yes, they MIGHT. However, Petrus was IMHO exaggerating the benefits of LSD
>in treatment of alcoholism. And the fact that administering psychedelics can
>make matters worse for some simply cannot be overly stressed.

>>Leary claims an 80% recidivism rate for prisoners (many of them violent) who
>>underwent his LSD prison therapy program. The normal rate for that prison was
>>20 percent (80% came back).

>   Uncle Timmy has made enough ridiculous claims to warrant my suspicion. I'm
>not saying it isn't true, just being sceptical. By the way, I am under the
>impression that the drug used in this case was psilocybin.

Well I don't believe Leary all the time because I know he has a real bent
toward exaggeration however I also know that he is a genuinely good guy
who honestly believes what he says. Besides every new idea sounds
rediculous at first. Leary never once had in all the times he turned on
and turned others on the kind of decapacitating effects you describe.
That's not to say they don't happen of course. Set and setting *really is*
important. The drug used -according to Leary (Flashbacks) was LSD.

>>Also his alcholic LSD therapy treatments were allegedly totally effective
>>50 % of the time. If only AA worked so well.

>   Again, I am under the impression that the AA experimented with LSD during
>its early days - and also that they abandoned it long before it was banned.

Given AA's approach to alcoholism that wouldn't be a big surprise.

>>to attribute all of these results to LSD. But anytime you form emotional
>>bonds with people that really care about you (and LSD aids this immensely)

>   Now, does it? This wouldn't be an individual thing, by any chance? I know
>enough people who have had emotionally crippling experiences with LSD to be
>highly sceptical. Many of these people were too smart and knowing to take the
>drug irresponsibly or casually.
>--
>Jani Heinonen		jah@mits.mdata.fi		Finger for PGP key

Well I don't know. Maybe it is personal. What do other netters experience
tell them? I mean I've just sort of taken this for granted as being part
of the LSD experience.

--
>>> For private correspondance, finger for my uuencoded pgp public key <<< 
InterNet: mikeh@tenet.edu
From: honig@binky.ics.uci.edu (David A. Honig)
Subject: Re: Eye redness experiment a success!
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Reply-To: honig@ics.uci.edu (David A. Honig)
Organization: UC Disneyland, in the Kingdom of Bren
Date: 23 Dec 92 23:59:39 GMT

 despair@netcom.com (Scott Hanson) writes:
>In article <something> bagg@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>[experiment deleted]
>>I suggest trying the experiment with a single eye protected with
>>goggles (and the other left exposed).  It's a more elegant
>>experiment that way.  If you're really ambitious you could have
>>independent observers (who were not present for the actual
>>smoking) 'score' your eye redness.
>
>I remember my eye doctor telling me that medication, infections (and I
>imagine smoke particles) are easily transferred from one eye to the other.
>Also, an irritation in one eye may affect the other.  The eye becomes red
>because of an allergic reaction, release of histamines, etc.  This may
>make both eyes turn red despite the possibility that the goggles really
>work.

 I know that one pupil will respond to light in the other eye, due to
shared neural connections.  Conjunctival injection (the med term for
red eyes) I have a harder time believing.

But Bagg's point is very important: the original poster included no control.
No control, no conclusion.

I didn't catch the orignal reason for doing this experiment, but
I can imagine it was hypothesized that redness if from topical irritation.
But smoking in a windy place keeps smoke off the eyes, yet they get red.
Another data point supporting the systemic counter-hypothesis.




--
David Honig

"Q: What does a C programmer say to an Ada(tm) programmer?
 A: I'll have a burger and fries, no onions."
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Bogus "THC"