HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman)
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 14:59:27 GMT

In <1992Jul29.004255.7398@pony.Ingres.COM> jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger) writes:
>Pete Hartman writes:
>> Would a "normal, happy, well-adjusted individual" (if such existed :-)
>> be addicted to a drug just because of itself?  I maintain not.
>You're welcome to, but the facts are against you.
>One of the advantages of using non-human subjects is we can control
>their backgrounds, pick any subjects we like, and see if the results
>replicate across individuals.  Science of this sort has had no trouble
>arranging circumstances that lead to addiction across organisms.

It's worth noting that most animals will not overdose unless their
environment is negative.  They will reach a point where they are
"happy" for lack of a better term, and stay there.  They don't
self destruct on drugs if they have a reasonable living condition.

Shall we engage in the battle of study cites? :-)

They may be "repeated regular users" of the drug in question, but
I question whether that is sufficient to consider "addiction" if
it is not done to the point of destructiveness.

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

Then why are there instances of people able to avoid addiction to these
substances despite their use?
-- 
Pete Hartman		       Bradley University	pwh@bradley.bradley.edu
                        Hail Eris!  All Hail Discordia!
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu (andy)
Subject: Re: LSD->Insanity (ooh, scary!)
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Reply-To: ahawks@nyx.UUCP (andy)
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 04:51:05 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.233639.48700@dante.uucp> mason@dante.uucp (Mason Jones)
writes: 
|
|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.
|
|Friends of ours from all over the country all have heard the same
|story, though the number <n> changes from person to person. 
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You already found the answer.  You had it with you all the time, but didn't
know it.  This posting just helped you realize it.   :) :) :)

|  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
|  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 ___________________________________________________________________________
|                                        |                                  |
| hawkeye (andy) :: ahawks@nyx.cs.du.edu |   Future Culture Mailing List!   |
|________________________________________|     Tomorrow's Reality Today     |
|                                        | cyberpunk, virtual reality, rave |
|  The Kracker Box BBS :: 303.438.1481   | computer underground, industrial |
|  120 megs...vt 100 reqd...14.4k baud   | [ future-request@nyx.cs.du.edu ] |
|________________________________________|__________________________________|

Newsgroups: alt.drugs,alt.privacy,alt.society.revolution,soc.culture.usa,alt.culture.usenet,comp.org.eff.talk,alt.society.civil-liberty,alt.sex
From: spencer@burn.Princeton.EDU (S. Spencer Sun)
Subject: Re: Please Feed the Spooks
Followup-To: alt.cascade
Organization: Live Organ Transplants
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 06:38:23 GMT

Use alt.cascade, please, that's what it's there for.

----------- The opinions expressed in this article are solely mine. -----------
<Insert lame attempt at disclaimer humor>
sss/PU'94 Dept of CS (spencer@phoenix.princeton.edu)/JvNCnet (spencer@jvnc.net)
"Just remember that / It's a grand illusion / And deep inside we're all
the same"  [Styx, "The Grand Illusion"]
From: ajk@fmg4a.att.com
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Xochipilli in _Whole Earth Review_ (was Re: 'Xochipilli' censorship
Date: 21 Jul 92 12:06:00 GMT

bill nelson writes:
>silly@plague.ugcs.caltech.edu (Brad Threatt) writes:
>: zane@infopls.chi.il.us (Sameer Parekh) writes:
>: 
>: >        I suggest that everyone write a letter to siggraph 
>: >(g-tech@siggraph.org) expressing your disgust at their decision to censor 
>: >"Xochipilli Speaks."
>: I couldn't find a thread relating to this.  Could someone please e-mail the
>: thread, or, if it's not to be found, post an explanation of what Siggraph is
>: doing?
>
>From what I have seen - someone submitted something to a conference or
>paper or whatever, and it was rejected as not being suitable subject matter.
>The author has decided that that is censorship. From the postings I have
>seen by the author, and the responses of other people, I have an idea the
>rejection was completely justified.
>
>Bill

This may or may not be related -- on the back cover of the current 
issue of _The Whole Earth Review_, there is an ad for a poster of 
Xochipilli, who is the Aztec "Prince of Flowers"; the image was 
computer-rendered from a multiply-filtered photograph of Xochipilli.  
X is sitting cross-legged on a pedestal, looking ecstatically upward.  
The pedestal and X's body are covered with designs that Gordon Wasson 
(among others) has identified as psilocybe caps, morning glory flowers 
and tendrils, and various other lesser-known meso-armerican psychoactive 
plants (see _The Encyclopedia of Psychoactive Drugs: Mushrooms_ for more 
info on this -- excellent book).  There is also sort of a half-halo of 
computer-generated models of various psychoactive molecules, such as MDMA, 
DMT, and ketamine, encircling X's head.  There are wispy white tendrils 
wafting out behind X.  It's actually a pretty neat picture.  The 
accompanying article says that it's the work of "Lordnose!", and that 
you can buy a poster of it for $28.  With the poster, you supposedly 
get a pamphlet (also by "Lordnose!") explaining the effects of various 
psychoactive plants (Note: I have no connection with _TWER_ or "Lordnose!").  
It also goes into excruciating detail of every step of the process 
used to create the image (what filtering programs were used, what 
workstations they were used on, etc.)  I don't recall it mentioning 
anything about SIGGRAPH, though.

andy
From: drk20509@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (mighty odin)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: LSD - After effects
Keywords: LSD, Acid, flashback, Ren & Stimpy
Date: 27 Jul 92 16:45:15 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana

mike@optimla.aimla.com (Mike Diehr) writes:


>I propose that flasbacks, as a biochemical result of LSD intake, simply do not exist, and are a mis-attribution of normal psychological events to prior LSD taking.  I believe the biochemistry shows that there is no possiblity of significant amounts of LSD staying around in the system, for the periods of time that people claim to have flashbacks for.

>Comments?

Ah ah ah! careful! (As someone else has already mentioned, ) lsd does not have
to remain in order to have a 'bio-chemical' effect. Studying for a test has
comparitive to the rest of the day, tremendous neurophysiological effects.
Does acid physically alter one's mind? YES, otherwise it would be defined
inert. Are the effects permanent? YES, these changes are otherwise known as
memories. Are the changes detrimental? That's up to you to decide. My opinion
is that the government lies have more detrimental long-term effects than any
psychedelics that I use regularily.



                        !help stamp out reality!

                             deadwolfkeiner
                           deadwolf@uiuc.edu
             University of Illinois @ Cham/bana, Illinois

                      (A Meta-Theoretical Odinist)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: lamontg@milton.u.washington.edu (Lamont Granquist)
Subject: Re: RFD: Recipe FAQ
Organization: 'Operation: Mindcrime'
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:13:47 GMT

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"?

If we're talking about *synthesis of drugs* (i.e. LSD, MDMA, Meth, others).
Then, no, there isn't an interested in a FAQ with recipies.  A FAQ, however,
telling someone to get a few years of chem, a Merck Index, and some lab
equipment is what is needed (and there is something like this in the Misc
FAQ -- it will be pointed out better in the future).  


-- 
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: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Xochipilli in _Whole Earth Review__
Date: 22 Jul 92 06:08:40 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest)

clauded@tekig6.PEN.TEK.COM (Steven R Denton) writes:
: Can someone please send me (or post) the address of LordNose?
: 
: claude

Email address: lordnose@well.sf.ca.us

Bob
-- 
Bob Cain    rcain@netcom.com   408-358-2007

Stomp out intolerance!
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: joelong@romeo.caltech.edu (Long, Joseph Louis)
Subject: Cookin' with da green guy
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Keywords: anus
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 05:45:00 GMT

I've seen the question posted before, but never really seen an answer
so...
We've all heard that oral consumption of mj (cooked of course) is a 
very different trip than smoked mj, right?  My question is: Is it just
as potent?  In other words do you need the same quantity to "get off"
as you do smoked, or less, or more?  Like if one usually smokes ~.5gm
is that how much they should cook into each serving of brownies (or 
whatever) or would that be too much/too little? 

If someone has a real answer to this, or someone just breaks down
and does an experiment :-) the info should be put into one of the 
FAQs, no?

thanks,
-joe      "Getting lost within myself.  Nothing matters no one else."
                                                 -Metallica
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: MrEd@GreenAcres
Subject: Re: Advertisement in the UK Times..
Organization: McGill University
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 17:37:08 GMT

In article <1992Jul25.065900.7840@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu>  
bchurch@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Robert Church) writes:
> In article <70429@apple.Apple.COM> morley@Apple.COM (John Morley) writes:
> 
> >ignorance in the UK.  I'm delighted to see the quote from Jimmy Carter.   
After
> >12 years of Reagan/Bush/Quayle, its damn refreshing to think back to happier
> >days when politics didn't always have to mean maximum hypocrisy.
> 
> You seem to have a strange definition of hypocrisy. Bush/Reagan think drugs
> are evil and will have you locked up for selling them. Carter says they're
> ok but still locks you up. Which is the most hypocritical?
> 
Agreed. A follow-up question. Did Carter actually DO anything about the  
legalization  of drugs, either as Governor of Georgia or as President of the  
USA or just talk about it ?
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: lewis@aera8700.mitre.org (Keith Lewis)
Subject: Re: THC
Supersedes: <1992Jul30.120644.12261@linus.mitre.org>
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 12:12:41 GMT

In article <Bs6I3u.I6E@world.std.com>, webber@world.std.com (Robert D Webber) writes:
>In article <1992Jul28.032605.4814@cam.compserv.utas.edu.au> mhergert@esk (Mark Ivan Hergert) writes:
>>*_-=-_._-=-_._-=-_._-=-_._-=-_._-=-_._-=-_*####################################
>>:                                         :                                   #
>>: "When logic and proportion have fallen  : AARNET:                           #
>>:  far be dead, and the White Knight is   : mhergert@esk.compserv.utas.edu.au #
>
>For what it's worth, that's "When logic and proportion have fallen
>_sloppy_ dead..."  Change the "When" to "Where" and you've got a good
>capsule description of USENET...

I think it's "...have fallen AS THOUGH TO BE dead."  Hey, I sang it that way
at Open Mike Night, and nobody corrected me.

And don't come to me with a lyric sheet saying I'm wrong.  I can show you at
least one hillariously wrong Jefferson Airplane lyric sheet.  One song ("A
Sign of Love" ?) would appear to be about a sign of GLOVES if you believed
the documentation.

Keith Lewis             klewis@mitre.org          "Mr. Cheap"
I don't dance to music; music dances to me.  Email me for my corrected PGP key.
The above may not (yet) represent the opinions of my employer.
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,sci.psychology,talk.politics.drugs
From: dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell)
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 03:15:13 GMT

In <1992Jul30.015235.25978@pony.Ingres.COM> jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger) writes:

>Pete Hartman writes:
>>> There are some substances that administered to the
>>> organism ... will eventually cause addiction.
>>
>> Explain what you mean by "eventually".
>
>Not necessarily the first time.  May take several administrations.

Then the substances you speak of are not the same substances that cause
addiction by 'mere exposure', no?


>> Explain what you mean by "addiction".
>
>As defined before (two times, previous msgs).

And rather poorly, I might add.


>> Define how extensive this "mere exposure" has to be
>> to be significant.
>
>Taking "significant" to mean "causing addiction", we don't define
>that, nature tells us.  You try it and you see.  Turns out it varies
>with substance, for instance.

Blather babble boo.  Speak English and answer his question.  'We don't
define that, nature tells us'?  Hahahahaha!  What a scientist!


>> Explain why you think it matters WRT legalization
>> of drugs for human consumption.
>
>State when I have said it does.
>Please read what I wrote.

He asked you a new question, dude.  If you don't have an opinion, tell him
to kiss off.  But at least admit you don't have an opinion.


>> next we're supposed to verify quarks for ourselves if we're interested?
>
>I'm not aware of anyone stopping you.  But the point here isn't
>whether you personally have the time, money, interest, or talent to.
>The point is either the results reproduce or they don't.

And my point has been that you haven't given your proof that the results
reproduce.  So why should we give a damn about what you say?

Either put your money where your mouth is or shut up.

-- 
=========*davE*.....making the world safe for intelligent dance music.=========
               Andre Marrou -- Libertarian for President 1992
--(David Vessell)--(Bradley University Computing Services)-(dave@bradley.edu)--
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: webber@world.std.com (Robert D Webber)
Subject: Re: THC
Keywords: THC
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 01:43:06 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.032605.4814@cam.compserv.utas.edu.au> mhergert@esk (Mark Ivan Hergert) writes:
>In article <2fgmcmg@lynx.unm.edu>, balzebub@lacerta.unm.edu (Mike Decker) writes:
...
>>I am quite disturbed by the amount of black resin which accumulates 
>>in paraphnelia... what must the lungs look like?  :(

They're nothing you'd be real happy seeing in your lap even if you
never smoked...  But my recollection from way back is that the lungs
have ways of ejecting tarry materials, that nicotine in tobacco
paralyzes this mechanism and that nothing in marijuana does.

For what it's worth, a guy I know who's a real stoner said that he
had to cut back when he started hacking up big wads of black phegm.
Think of it this way, your lungs look that much better for the stuff
that condenses out...

>>Is it possible to filter out some of the black -stuff- without also 
>>filtering THC?  If THC is a gas, it seems possible to both inhale THC
>>and filter goo with the simple addition of a wet cloth over a mouth-
>>piece.  

So far as I know, you're getting TCH _vapour_, and short of fractional
distillation you're not going to get just the stuff you want without
some crud.  That only happens in the fantasies of politicians...

...
>P.S. Have you tried the tissue of the bong trick to see how much
>	shit you actually breath in.  Do it. If you want better
>	lungs, smoke joints.  You won't get such a great hit,
>	but it may be worth it.

I don't see your point.  Back when I smoked regularly I felt like
my respiratory system did a lot better smoking through a bong or
even a pipe.  Maybe you should apply the same test to other means
of smoking: presumably you'll get crud from your rolling papers, too.

>*_-=-_._-=-_._-=-_._-=-_._-=-_._-=-_._-=-_*####################################
>:                                         :                                   #
>: "When logic and proportion have fallen  : AARNET:                           #
>:  far be dead, and the White Knight is   : mhergert@esk.compserv.utas.edu.au #

For what it's worth, that's "When logic and proportion have fallen
_sloppy_ dead..."  Change the "When" to "Where" and you've got a good
capsule description of USENET...


-- 
Bob Webber, webber@world.std.com ===========================================
==========================================================  Laurie Anderson:
Every man...  Every man for himself...
All in favour say, "Aye."
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:13439 talk.politics.drugs:5291
From: lamontg@milton.u.washington.edu (Lamont Granquist)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Drug-Slavery/Addiction (was Re: Partial Legalization)
Date: 24 Jul 92 06:58:12 GMT
Organization: 'Operation: Mindcrime'

al@spring.unr.edu (Al Benincasa) writes:
>addiction is not a desease.....It's a disgrace

  o Thank you for the helpful comment.
  o You misspelled 16.7% of the words in that post.

-- 
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
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,sci.psychology,talk.politics.drugs
From: dave@bradley.bradley.edu (David Vessell)
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: sci.psychology
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 17:59:19 GMT

jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger) writes:

>Indeed I have not.  How many times have you attributed a position,
>claim, or assertion to me that I never took, stated, or made?
>Well, a count makes little difference; it exceeds "too many".
>When you can demonstrate you read what I wrote, I'll be happy to
>continue.

Are you having fun?  

Nothing I've read in this entire thread has struck me as inconsistent
except for you.  Every time someone challenges a statement you made, you say
"I didn't say that."  Every time someone asks you for references on the
claims you've made, you say "Get your own data."

Why did you even bother to get into this debate when it's obvious you have
nothing of importance or substance to say?
-- 
=========*davE*.....making the world safe for intelligent dance music.=========
               Andre Marrou -- Libertarian for President 1992
--(David Vessell)--(Bradley University Computing Services)-(dave@bradley.edu)--
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:13463 talk.politics.drugs:5308
From: morley@Apple.COM (John Morley)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Advertisement in the UK Times..
Summary: Way to go lads!
Date: 24 Jul 92 17:46:03 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

In article <1992Jul24.142221.2031@decuk.uvo.dec.com>, jf@decuk.uvo.dec.com (Jason Flowers) writes:
> 
> 	Hi all,
> 
> 	Just thought I'd let you know that the 24th of July issue of the
> 	'The Times' newspaper features a full page legalise cannabis 
> 	advertisement, this is 25 years after the fist one appeared,
> 	The advertisement goes like this...
> 	
> 	JUST SAY NOW (in large bold type across the page)
> 
> -- stuff deleted --
> 	
> 	The Experts Say
> 
> -- stuff deleted --
> 	
> 	"On any objective reckoning cannabis must at present get a cleaner
> 	 bill of health than our other legalised 'recreational drugs'."
> 	- A REPORT ON DRUGS AND DRUG DEPENDENCE BY THE ROYAL COLLEGE OF
> 	  PSYCHIATRISTS, 1987
>
> -- stuff deleted --
> 
> 	"The only solution to the drug problem is the legalisation of all
> 	 drugs. If this is too radical and too much opposed to recieved
> 	 wisdom and decades of conditioning then perhaps we could begin
> 	 by repealing the laws against the drug which has been shown by
> 	 several impartial investigations to be at least no more harmful
> 	than alcohol, and whose use causes the most conflict between users
> 	and the law: cannabis."
> 	- SERGEANT GORDON PAYNE, THE POLICE REVIEW, 28/2/92
> 
> -- stuff deleted --
> 
> 	"Penalties against possesion of a drug should not be more damaging
> 	 to an individual than the use of the drug itself: and where they
> 	 are, they should be changed. Nowhere is this more clear than the
> 	 laws against possesion of marijuana in private for personal use."
> 	- US PRESIDENT JIMMY CARTER, QUOTING FROM THE N.C.M.D.A., 1977
> 
> -- stuff deleted --
> 
Sorry for adding to the bandwidth by repeating some of this post, but the
quotes from this ad are real gems.  Best wishes to the forces against
ignorance in the UK.  I'm delighted to see the quote from Jimmy Carter.  After
12 years of Reagan/Bush/Quayle, its damn refreshing to think back to happier
days when politics didn't always have to mean maximum hypocrisy.

Bill Clinton and Al Gore take note.  Supporting the war on rights may be
politically popular today but don't try to portray yourselves as agents of
change when you don't have the guts to stand up in public and denounce unfair
laws that both of you violated in the past but were lucky enough not to get
caught doing.  Until you wake up and smell the roaches, you'll still be slick
Willy to me (even if you did have cool music at the convention).

- John (I'm voting for Nobody)

*******************************************************************************
* Std Disclaimer:   My opinions are mine.        |  Billboard seen next to a  *
*                   Apple's opinions are Apple's.|  cemetary said:            *
*                   Sometimes they are similar.  |  "If you were dead,        *
*                   Sometimes they are not.      |   you'd be home by now."   *
*******************************************************************************
From: dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer)
Subject: Re: Ketamine et al.
Keywords: ketamine fish-heads monkey-meat
Organization: S.P. Dyer Computer Consulting, Cambridge MA
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 12:02:12 GMT

In article <22JUL199223224454@romeo.caltech.edu> joelong@romeo.caltech.edu (Long, Joseph Louis) writes:
>Do "recreational" anesthetics (like Ketamine or N2O) induce respiratory
>arrest?

It depends. :-)  In thee two cases, usually not, but that's exploiting the
unusual characteristics of the two drugs.

>My point is not all anesthetics were created equal... right?
>If so maybe I'm dead and sending this message from 
>joe@nitrous.heaven.org :-)

But the guy who asked the original question did the _opposite_:
he generalized inappropriately from ketamine to a laundry-list
of drugs, any one of which would kill him if he tried to self-
administer them.

-- 
Steve Dyer
dyer@ursa-major.spdcc.com aka {ima,harvard,rayssd,linus,m2c}!spdcc!dyer