HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cromwell@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,sci.psychology
Subject: Re: instant addiction?
Date: 25 Jul 92 08:59:55 CDT
Organization: University of Kansas Academic Computing Services

>    >One thing I recall reading in the days before crack is that
>    >supposedly, cocaine is very psychologically addicting, BUT... if a
>    >person cannot find any cocaine, they will fairly quickly "lose
>    >their addiction."  In other words, an "addict" will look
>    >frantically for more cocaine, but if they know that they _cannot_
>    >get any (e.g., they're in solitary confinement in jail), they will
>    >not experience much psychological distress after a day or two.  Is
>    >this typical?  Would they become psychologically re-addicted if
>    >the drug was available again? 
> 
> The currently accepted definition of addiction is that it means being
> willing to do things that are damaging to oneself and to others in
> order to obtain a substance.  By this definition most of the people
> you describe are addicted the whole time.

You point out a problem that exists between clinical definition and
popular definition for addiction.  In the 80's restrictions were
placed on the types of treatments and the amount of money that health
care could charge for a particular illness.  For this and other reasons,
hospitals and other health care institutions needed another source of
income.  They found it in redefining addictions-calling them diseases.
My book more rightfully calls alcoholism a syndrome, a pattern of behavior
which eventually leads to medical problems, like the pain in my wrists
from typing.  Statistically, these high dollar rehabs don't have any
higher rates of success than AA-which is free. (AA reports inflated
success and in-patient treatment may be less effective)
I think that it is great to reclassify things based on new
evidence-but this was an economic and political reclassification.
-- 
Rick 
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: cj@eno.corp.sgi.com (C J Silverio)
Subject: blotter art: some gifs
Reply-To: cj@eno.corp.sgi.com (C J Silverio)
Organization: SGI TechPubs
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 18:38:54 GMT

---
My friend Lance has a book with some lovely color pictures of
blotter art.  Apparently it's part of an NEA-funded exhibit, but
Lance has the details.  He'll post about it if he feels like
it.  Anyway, last night I scanned them in & did a little
processing work on them.

I present them here for your viewing enjoyment.

My next ten or so posts will contain ten uuencoded gif files.
They aren't very large, so I don't think bandwidth will be a
problem.  I will tag all the subject lines with "blotter art:",
so you can kill them all sight unseen if you want to.

Do NOT post or send mail asking how to view these files.  I
won't answer.  Go read the FAQs in the alt.binaries.pictures.*
hierarchy instead.

---
cj@eno.corp.sgi.com      C J Silverio/Brahms Gang/Berkeley CA 94720
"The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men 
of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding."  --Louis B. Brandeis
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: rcain@netcom.com (Robert Cain)
Subject: Re: Xochipilli in _Whole Earth Review_ (was Re: 'Xochipilli' censorship
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 92 05:01:05 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 

bprofane@netcom.com (Gert Niewahr) writes:
:
: Their warning that users may form inappropriate emotional
: attachments under the influence of MDMA (Ecstacy) also shows a lot
: of insight.  
: 

That broke me up but it is so true.  "Inappropriate emotional attachments",
unusual and correct.

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

Stomp out intolerance!
From: lamontg@milton.u.washington.edu (Lamont Granquist)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Info. on nutmeg
Date: 23 Jul 92 17:32:55 GMT
Organization: 'Operation: Mindcrime'

781101@redgum.bcae.oz.au (100) writes:
>  I have also heard reports of using the active components (myristicin
>I think) as a reagent in the synthesis of other psychoactive drugs. Is
>this true, and if so, how easy is it to do. I am studying Organic Chem.,
>so any reaction mechanisms etc will be handy. If you can help, please
>e-mail me. Thanx...

myristicin can be used to make MMDA.  See Shulgin's PIHKAL book for 
synthesis instructions.  Its also possible to make MMDA from myristicin
from a liver preparation which has caused some theorizing that the
myristicin in nutmeg is actually metabolized into MMDA in the body, which
gets you buzzed.

I think there might be other essential oils in nutmeg which can be
used to make TMA, MDMA, MDA and other nifty shit...  Offhand, I can't
remember which ones are in nutmeg and which ones you need to find
elsewhere -- again see PiHKAL.

-- 
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
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:13637 talk.politics.drugs:5400
From: bchurch@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu (Robert Church)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
Subject: Re: Advertisement in the UK Times..
Date: 28 Jul 92 16:33:36 GMT
Organization: Ohio University School of Art,. Athens

In article <02lm6z-.bprofane@netcom.com> bprofane@netcom.com (Gert Niewahr) writes:

>"Decriminalize" isn't the same as legalize, and anyway I think only

Amen! Decriminalization is the ultimate hypocrisy. It's saying that we'll
overlook possesion since me or the kids might want some pot but we'll continue
to lock up the guy who sells it to us since that's good politics.



-- 
*********************************************
*    bob church                             *
*    bchurch@oucsace.cs.ohiou.edu           *
*    D-8195 NFS #27                         *
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: gaspar@inf.ethz.ch (gaspo)
Subject: Re: RFD: Recipe FAQ
Keywords: d{
Organization: Twilight-Zone-Algorithms-Incorporated
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 06:57:51 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.182804.1@vax.sonoma.edu> feinstei@vax.sonoma.edu writes:
>I was wondering if there is any interest in a FAQ containing recipes 
>appropriate for this group... Any comments?

I don't know if a seperate FAQ is neccessary, but perhaps a seperate
section on the "mj consumption FAQ".

If somebody is willing to compile,...

well, shit.  I'll compile recipes if anybody has any.  I have my own
bronwie recp, and a handfull of non-written ones, but can always use
more.

--gaspo.


- Scott "gaspo" Gasparian / Dept. Informatik -    |    - Umwelt    -
- Stabstelle Software / System Administrator -  \ | /  -  Schutzen,-
- ETH-Zentrum,  CH-8092 Zurich,  Switzerland -  _\|/_  - Rad       -
- gaspar@inf.ethz.ch     /   +41'01'254'7205 -   '|`   -  Benutzen.-
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: lane@ug.cs.dal.ca (David Lane)
Subject: Re: What is the Health Risk from Smoking MJ?
Keywords: Smoking, Tobacco, Marijuana, Health
Organization: Math, Stats & CS, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 16:12:39 GMT

In article <15868@pitt.UUCP> geb@dsl.pitt.edu (gordon e. banks) writes:
>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
>
>I believe Bob Marley died from smoking so much ganga he got lung
>cancer.
>
>-- 
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Gordon Banks  N3JXP      | "Skepticism is the chastity of the intellect, and
>geb@cadre.dsl.pitt.edu   |  it is shameful to surrender it too soon." 
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Newsgroups: alt.drugs,sci.psychology,talk.politics.drugs
From: pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman)
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 20:51:42 GMT

In <1992Jul29.200950.29103@pony.Ingres.COM> jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger) writes:
>Pete Hartman writes:
>> most animals will not overdose unless their environment is negative.
>An interesting theory.  Where's your data?  How was environment varied?

Pardon me for not being a walking psych encyclopedia, but you can reference
my ~200 line post quoted from _The Case for Legalizing Drugs_ that references
a study that found that "monkeys allowed to smoke crack limited their
intake".  (note that that is far from the only reference cited, but
the only one directly relating to animal drug use).

I can't recall the other references I've read, so sorry, but I didn't see
any cites in your posting giving detailed experimental descriptions
of your conclusion that addiction had been demonstrated across the
animal kingdom for "some classes" of drugs, namely cocaine.

If you care to refute my longer post at length, maybe we will have some
basis for further debate.
-- 
Pete Hartman		       Bradley University	pwh@bradley.bradley.edu
                               KICK OUT THE JAMS!
From: lewis@aera8700.mitre.org (Keith Lewis)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: birth control pills
Date: 27 Jul 92 19:34:08 GMT
Organization: The MITRE Corporation

In article <geR2w1S00WB24FMH9u@andrew.cmu.edu>, "Alan S. Ferrency" <af1x+@andrew.cmu.edu>
>Hello.  Does anyone know of any drugs that have bad effects when used when
>someone is on birth control pills?  I kind of think there's not much danger,
>but I was told to ask, so I will...

Read the information that comes with the pills.  If you did not get a
booklet with them, read the Merck Manual and/or the Physicians' Desk
Reference.  

Among other things, every one of these sources will tell you that combining
the pill with heavy tobacco use is a no-no.

>"Drugnet:  'The FAQs, man, where's the FAQs?"

:^)    Serious answer:  milton.u.washington.edu

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: pwh@bradley.bradley.edu (Pete Hartman)
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Organization: Bradley University
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 08:39:20 GMT

In <1992Jul30.020354.27499@pony.Ingres.COM> jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger) writes:
>bill nelson writes:
>>> I took no "position", I summarized data.  Either they replicate
>>> or they don't.  Sorry, not much controversy here.
>> I have seen no data - or studies quoted by you - maybe I missed them.
>I said summarize, not present.

Your summary has no content without citations to back it up, any more
than my claim that animal addiction varies with environment--I can
stand by that forever because I recall having read a real source for
the data, but I don't realistically expect you to believe me based on
my say so.

>> There was a posting listing a whole series of studies - these studies
>> went counter to your arguments.
>If you read what I wrote, you'll discover that I made no assertion
>counter to them.

You have asserted that cocaine is addictive in humans.  Among other
points, my long post included references that indicate that this is
not so.
-- 
Pete Hartman		       Bradley University	pwh@bradley.bradley.edu
                  A hippopotamus is not a symphony orchestra!
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,sci.psychology,talk.politics.drugs
From: remke@cs.tu-berlin.de (Jan K. Remke)
Subject: Re: Partial Legalization
Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 11:05:08 GMT

In article <BILL.92Jul29104931@ca3.nsma.arizona.edu>, bill@nsma.arizona.edu (Bill Skaggs) writes:
> jpk@Ingres.COM (Jon Krueger) writes:
> 
>    There is a class of substances whose mere exposure leads to addiction.
> 
> Am I misreading this, or are you saying that for some drugs
> administering the drug to somebody without their consent would cause
> them to be addicted?
> 
> If this is what you're saying, can you cite some evidence to back it
> up?
> 
> If not, can you please clarify?
> 
> 	-- Bill

Addiction is relative, YEAH, relative to the strength of YOU OWN EGO.
I have been *HEAVILY* abusing HEROIN (years ago) and no sign of bodyly
addiction showed up, I just liked to smoke it, because of the turn it
delivered, but NO cold turkey at all, and I don't think I have such a
heavy or special body (I even had a heart operation as a child) and
the rest is normal, only Ihave a very *STRONG* EGO.

Now, I'm smoking randomly MJ, but not that often...

Addiction is relative, it depends *ONLY* on the ego one has...

That's al 4 now, folks...
Yours:
Jan

-- 
Jan K. Remke, Postfach 304041, W-1000 Berlin 30, Tel. auf Anfrage...
remke@cs.tu-berlin.de / remke@nostromo.sub.org (Planet Earth sytems)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesus loves you - Problems remaining: Worldwide Terrorism on Earth !
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:13720 sci.psychology:3301 talk.politics.drugs:5425
From: lewis@aera8700.mitre.org (Keith Lewis)
Subject: Re: carcinogenicity of mj smoke com
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 16:39:57 GMT

In article <1992Jul23.152527.11505@hubcap.clemson.edu>, mbcamps@hubcap.clemson.edu (Matt Campbell) writes:
>My roomate and I are having a battle over what is the primary carcinogen
>in cigarettes/MJ.  I beleive that the group of chemicals termed as "tar"
>is the primary carcinogen in cigarettes, my roommate charges that Nicotene
>is the primary carcinogen (thus low MJ cancer risk).  Who's right?

It isn't nicotine.  Nicotine patches, nicotine gum, and "smokeless"
cigarettes all give you the nic buzz with a much-reduced risk of cancer.

Marijuana smoke is probably as bad as tobacco smoke, but marijuana users
tend to smoke less; hence they have a lower cancer rate than tobacco users.

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
From: hughes@gary.enet.dec.com (Gary Hughes - VMS Development)
Subject: Re: Ancient hash
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 19:48:31 GMT


In article <1992Jul29.072033.19914@neptune.inf.ethz.ch>, gaspar@inf.ethz.ch (gaspo) writes...
>In article <92210.141718HZS@psuvm.psu.edu> Therion <HZS@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>>Here's something really interesting I received from a Israeli listserv:
>[..]
>>Israeli-developed  drug-revealing  spray  called  Canby-Spray  was  used  to
>>identify the presence of the hashish.
>[..]
>>
> 
>oh great.  forget the dogs, forget the piss-test...
> 

Something like that is on sale in the US, for use by 'concerned parents' to
detect traces of drugs on papers, furniture etc.

I saw an interview on Larry King with some guy that had turned in his son
(early teens) having detected the evil weed by way of this spray (there is one
for cocaine too). He was promoting some wacko outfit with a name like
tough-love, or stop-it-or-I'll-beat-the-shit-out-of-you or something like that.

The interview was mostly about the treatment method (and the father came off
like a real jerk), but it occurred to me that these sprays could probably be
sold to potential users as quality control devices.

When aerosols are outlawed, only outlaws will have aerosols...

gary
From: zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM (Sameer Parekh)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: ...Of the Jungle
Date: 29 Jul 92 04:47:09 GMT
Organization: ddsw1.MCS.COM Contributor, Chicago, IL
X-Disclaimer:  Material posted in this article is the sole responsibility of
                the poster and does not represent MCSNet or the system owners.


	What do people think of the ...Of the Jungle catalog? What are
people's favorite items?  Also, I've been looking at the "Dream Drops" They
seem promising. Does anyone know more about these?
	Also, I saw stuff in there for tobacco-type stuff.  Particularly the
non-nicotine-containing tobacco.  Could that be useful in helping people to
stop smoking?
	Thanks.
-- 
  _Sameer_Parekh_zane@ddsw1.MCS.COM_zane@infopls.chi.il.us__________________
 / STOP The War on Rights          | | Restore liberty in the United States \
 | "Specialization is for Insects" | | Vote Libertarian 1992          ______/
 \________- Robert A. Heinlein_____/ \_ap.2363@cupid.sai.com (anon)__/
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
From: lamontg@milton.u.washington.edu (Lamont Granquist)
Subject: Re: WANTED:CANNABUS Seeds
Organization: 'Operation: Mindcrime'
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:17:53 GMT

remke@cs.tu-berlin.de (Jan K. Remke) writes:
>In article <lamontg.711654248@milton>, lamontg@milton.u.washington.edu (Lamont Granquist) writes:
>> You do realize that people have gotten busted by the FBI for posting
>> messages on computer nets don't you?  No one for buying drugs yet, but
>> I'm just kinda waiting for it to happen...
>
>Disclaimer and answer to that above:
>To all the police of this planet. Realize, that *YOU* have *LOST*
>the 'Drug War'. You can bust as many users around the world, but
>you won't be able to get the 'real big ones', HA HA HA !!!
>So realize, my dear Cops, that you can give it up - you waste time...
>I am from the Netherlands, and there a good drug policy is coming up.
>(Even if I would be caught smoking a joint, they dont win the war
>against the drug, by busting me, they are the *REAL LOOSERS* !!!)
>
>F... the Drug War, motherf... all politicians and drug laws...

Answer to the above?

Hell, I *agree* to all that.

I just wondered if you realized that what you just did was kinda like
walking into the computer room at the NSA and FBI while shouting
"DAMMIT DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY KILLER BUDS ON 'EM?!?!?!?!!"

Well, go ahead, they probably wont care too much if *you* setup a transaction
over the net.  For me, however, they'd probably love to bust my ass doing
something like that -- it could make some good press I bet, and it'd also
shut me up...

(oh you're in .de aren't you?  Well, substitute NSA and FBI for your
favorite enforcement agencies over there...)

-- 
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
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Floaters (was Re: LSD - After effects)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:14:57 GMT

ges@stiatl.salestech.com (Gerald Sullivan) writes:
: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
: >ges@stiatl.salestech.com (Gerald Sullivan) writes:
: >: It has nothing to do with the retina.  Detached retinas are usually cause 
: >: by injuries to the eye.
: >I believe that another cause is excessive fluid pressure in the eye.
: 
: I do not beleive this is true either. Excessive pressure in the eye
: is a symptom of Glaucoma. Glaucoma causes blindness by damaging the
: retina, not detaching it. It has been years since I worked in a
: eye surgeons office, so take my opinion with appropriate grains
: of salt.

I seem to recall that one of the symptoms of degeneration of the retina
due to glaucoma was a detaching of the retina. However, it has been a
decade or more since I studied the subject. Obviously, you should take
my opinion with an even larger dose of NaCl.

Bill
From: pck@acsu.buffalo.edu (Philip C. Kilinskas)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs
Subject: Re: Growing 'shrooms in rice. Repost Please!
Date: 24 Jul 92 16:18:45 GMT
Organization: UB

I think this is the article posted earlier:
------------------------------------------------------------------
From: turpin@cs.utexas.edu (Russell Turpin)
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,sci.med
Subject: "Qi" and marijuana.
Followup-To: sci.med,alt.drugs
Date: 29 Jul 1992 12:21:14 -0500
Organization: U Texas Dept Computer Sciences, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu
Summary: [Oh, gee, someone has to do it.]

-*----
In article <1992Jul29.092348.23625@newshost.anu.edu.au> (David Tomlinson) writes:
> As a practitioner of Traditional Chinese Medicine I have
> only this to say about MJ.
> In the Chinese model of medicine, there is a energy channel
> that runs from the base of your neck to your tailbone.
> MJ burns "qi" or energy or life-force or whatever you want
> to call it from this channel. The effect is twofold on heavy
> dope smokers. 1) They all have lower back problems ...

Is there any empirical way to measure this burning of "qi"?  Is
there any empirical way to detect "qi" at all??

Is there *any* empirical evidence that marijuana smokers suffer
more from lower back problems that do others?  (The claim that
*all* marijuana sufferers suffer from lower back problems is
easily refuted.) Has any "practitioner of Traditional Chinese
Medicine" attempted a well-designed, statistical study of this?
If such a study were done, and no correlation found, would
"practitioner[s] of Traditional Chinese Medicine" modify their
model? 

And if the answer is "no" to some of the above questions, then
why post in SCI.med?

Russell
Organization: Freshman, H&SS general, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: alt.drugs,talk.politics.drugs
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1992 12:33:43 -0400 
From: William Spaulding Wood <ww1i+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: Helicopters (was Re: Perot and the War on Drugs)

An Excerpt from _The New Social Drug: Cultural, Medical, and Legal
Perspectives on Marijuana_
Edited By David E. Smith, M.D.
Published by Prentice-Hall, Inc, Englewood Cliffs New Jersey, 1970

Page 1:
"In the late 1930's the Federal Narcotics Beareau spearheaded an all out
attack on marijuana.  It claimed the drug led to insanity, crime,
violence and moral degeneration.  This position was liberally supported
by the alcohol lobby, primarily for economic reasons, since users of
marijuana tend to reduce their alcohol consumption.  As a result
marijuana was mislabled a narcotic and very strict legal penalties were
imposed on those who used or sold the drug.  When the La Guardia Report,
published in 1944, disproved these alegations, the battle cry became
"marijuana leads to heroine."  This prohibition remained in force as
governtment agencies effectively banned almost all marijuana research so
that no new information could be developed to counter previous
misconceptions."

Well, coruption was definitely the cause (by who is a complex issue,
with not just the alcohol lobby or the oil coilition at its heart), and
will probably be the biggest obsical for future attempts at
legalization.  Remember, politicians get payed more for voting where the
money is, not to suggest that any Congresperson would accept large
`donations' in return for small favors, but...well, your smart enough to
figure out how this all works.

    ~wig, Still campaining for God in '92 (and boy will there be some
changes if I'm elected)
Xref: sparky alt.drugs:13433 sci.psychology:3221 talk.politics.drugs:5289