[SuchFriendsAreDangerous]

Originally Posted by Severian

What I think is happening here is that you're reading "toxic" as "bad." But it's valueless. Again, it's a cold, clinical word.

no its not. yes i understand that at a macro level toxic implies what you say. but if you hadn't noticed this is a micro discussion. i posted the definition of toxic at this level. psilocybin is not neurotoxic, does not cause harm to brain tissues. THAT is why i reject the term toxic for THIS discussion. its an important point. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING BUT STOP BEING SO OBSTINATE AND HEAR ME OUT FOR A CHANGE. its not an attack on you, it just is what it is

And you have to remember that the scientific and medical communities don't operate under the presupposition that mushrooms are **spiritual.

you did realize i posted more science here than you yes? spiritual was a description of the EFFECT of the high, but i have provided plenty of evidence about the underlying SCIENCE but i guess you want to get caught up on the spiritual comment and so disregarded or didn't read anything i posted or checked out any of the links i shared. hey its your loss I FOR ONE ENJOYED THE RESEARCH so i don't mind at all.

When talking about the pharmacological effects of a substance in the body, there is a taxonomy in place to categorize and define the effects of substances. You have to be open to the fact that the established scientific view of mushrooms is irrevocably tied up in the legality of their consumption. Therefore, what we call a "high", or you call a "quest", is in cold laboratory terminology, called "toxicity."

NO. In this conversation and to the degree we are zooming in we are talking about psychoactive effects, the pharmacodynamics of psilocybin. toxicity is simply TOO SIMPLISTIC. zoom in with me you'll enjoy it as much as i did..

you're not wrong in general about toxicity, but try and understand what i am talking about, i know you can if you read what i posted and shared rather than argue petty details to somehow make yourself "right" and me somehow "wrong"

The people who study these drugs and establish these terms view the mushroom "highs" you and I have had — the ones we cherish in our memories — as BAD things.

not necessarily at all. psychoactivity doesn't always have a moral connotation. scientists can study the pharmacodynamics without asserting a moral judgment. and again, at a pharmacodynamic level psilocybin is NOT toxic which is to say DOES NOT CAUSE HARM TO TISSUES. hence the concept of THERAPEUTIC RATIO

You seem to have a lot of extremely one sided views on a lot of topics, SFAD. I respect your position here, and I understand where you're coming from, because frankly, in my personal experience, mushrooms have been largely a ton of fun, but that's not how the medical establishment or scientific community views them, or their effects.

i posted plenty of science, studies, and data. read it. go ahead, pretend this is somehow.about me if it makes you feel smarter or better. i am not the scientist, i didn't conduct the studies. but i do know how to read them, and i know you know how to read them, but i fear you mistake this for some kind of pissing contest too much to actually read the research i shared. fine, but that is your loss.

By arguing so intensely against the words I've used, you've managed to sound rather egocentric, as though your experience is THE experience. But most of the world still views these things as highly illegal, dangerous, and yeah, toxic drugs. You can't reasonably punish me for using the sci community's terminology, and you certainly can't reasonably call my intelligence into question for doing so.


(** I could argue just as tirelessly against this adjective as you have against "toxic," only my argument would make sense. What is "spiritual?" (Don't actually answer that... please) ... What evidence supports this word being used as an operational definition of the properties of psilocybin? Saying they're "spiritual" only muddies the waters further by assigning a whole lot of unmeasurable significance to a fucking fungus. I'm not saying they're NOT spiritual (or, rather, that they don't have a history of being used in a spiritual or meditative capacity by cultures and individuals), but you can't have a scientific discussion and then start bandying about words like that. If you want to have a cultural or philosophical discussion about mushrooms, then we can talk about spirituality. But for Christ's sake, choose a door and walk through it!

haha again i notice you keep arguing about like only one thing i said, spiritual, but YOU HAVEN'T ADDRESSED ANYTHING ELSE I SAID, SHARED, OR POSTED. that tells me YOU DIDN'T READ THE STUDIES i shared. it tells me you are being half assed about this conversation.

i enjoyed what i learned by the way. i didn't see this as an argument at all but frankly I'm under the impression you don't particularly like me much anymore and so you continue to misconstrue my posts to you as somehow being antagonistic or hostile. not my intent at all. i just wanted to have a very detailed conversation about the pharmacology of psilocybin but i suppose you're just not interested. oh well again i myself.enjoyed learning many new things about how both LSD and psilocybin act on the brain and how they are different