OT: Drugs & Music

Post by **garyb** » Tue Sep 10, 2002 2:05 am

p.s. no one needs drugs to live,there are many different kinds of medicine.also see definitions earlier.marijuana is not a drug.it is an herb.i don't suggest indiscriminate experimentation with herbs either.i remember when my son and his friends found jimson weed growing in a field near our home.it was kinda funny those kids all stoned out and having difficulty moving because of the hallucinations.it held me up on the way to a gig tho,and one of them peeeeed on my piano.(not his normal behavior)

of course,the parents all thought it was my fault.i don't encourage irresponsibility tho....

that same son is a crackhead for a living now and is schizophrenic.we don't really know if the abuse of body chemistry he put(and puts)himself through exasperated his condition or not,but drugs such as crack and speed and pcp (not to mention lsd)seem to cause extreme psychotic reactions.(paranoia becomes violent and deadly,just like demonic possesion in "the exorcist")

it's a fine line between heaven and hell.......

[ This Message was edited by: garyb on 2002-09-10 03:07 ]

Retro · Post by **Retro** » Tue Sep 10, 2002 3:33 am

And the "heaven" people associate with drugs is completely fake. The bliss you experience in advanced meditation can certainly be likened to the euphoria of ecstasy, but the difference is you retain complete lucidity. In fact your lucidity is dramatically enhanced! No drug is a shortcut to real bliss.

[ This Message was edited by: Retro on 2002-09-10 04:38 ]

braincell · Post by **braincell** » Wed Sep 11, 2002 9:13 am

Bliss? What does bliss have to do with anything. If we were all happy surely nothing would ever get done.

I don't know about you guys but I listen to a lot of music that clearly was influenced by drugs. I think these musicians probably could make music without drugs but surely it would not sound the same for good or for bad.
Personally I am thankful for the electronic music that comes out of London.

Atomic:

I thought about Reason but would this be an advantage over the SFP?

Very Very OT.

Today is 9-11 and the media is full of all this crap about it. Nevermind that thousands more people die due to drunk drivers. I guess planes crashing into buildings is more dramatic. It seems almost alright for us to kill ourseleves but just don't let those foreigners do it.

mr swim · Post by **mr swim** » Wed Sep 11, 2002 10:22 am

(quote: Garyb)
p.s. no one needs drugs to live,there are many different kinds of medicine.also see definitions earlier.marijuana is not a drug.it is an herb

- interesting that you make the distinction between marijuana and drugs. Rather like the work 'weed' (generic, not euphamism for marijuana), the word drug is entirely relative to its use. Weeds are only weeds when they stop humans carrying out their horticultural aims e.g. growing wheat. Marijuana is just a plant, but THC is a psychoactive chemical. Chemicals which have an affect on the body (which includes the mind/brain) become drugs. So 'drugs' is a relative term.

And I don't think that things which are natural can't be drugs. In fact the whole distinction seems pretty vague. Is penicillin a drug ? Well, yes, of course, its an anti-biotic (now made through completely 'artificial' means). But of course it is naturally occurring.

I am always reminded in this debate about 'natural' versus 'artificial' of cynide. Not all natural things are good for you (Rattle-snakes might be another example).

Neither are all artificial things bad for you (for instance penicillin, or beds)

One thing which might be of interest though, is that natural products like Liberty Caps (English magic mushrooms) have evolved in the same environment as humans. It might be that such things are less harmful as a consequence - compare plants becoming poisonous to stop animals eating them, animals becoming immune to the poison so they can eat them, plants evolving to produce a stonger poison etc - in such cases the current winner of the relationship is only one step ahead evolutionarily than the loser.

However, in the case of man-made drugs, such a process has not taken place. It could I suppose be compared the gene-splicing as opposed to artificial breeding !

Anyway, I think that while I have taken drugs, the world is a pretty intense drug for me . . . I don't do any drugs apart from alcohol, cigarettes, the occasional toke on a spliff and the odd mushroom.

nicked · Post by **nicked** » Wed Sep 11, 2002 11:19 am

interesting to note - my experience as an inhabitant of glasgow is that almost everyone i know has gone through a period of taking what might by people from elsewhere be regarded as enormous quantities of drugs, especially mdma. very few if any of the people i know have had lasting bad experiences. whereas by contrast my experience of people in the usa, who have taken by comparison very small quantities of the same substances, is that they all know someone who had 'bad experiences'. my assertion is that in the usa there is a cultural pressure to have 'bad experiences' - people EXPECT to have 'bad experiences', therefore they do.

nicked · Post by **nicked** » Wed Sep 11, 2002 11:32 am

oh, sorry - music.

i know quite a few top underground techno producers, and most of them have been psychedelic drug users in the past, but are not any longer. it helps you know what works if you have been part of a luvdup crowd. nearly all of them use weed. however most of the original detroit guys were pretty straight i think. on the other hand, it wasn't called acid house for no reason.

Retro · Post by **Retro** » Wed Sep 11, 2002 1:08 pm

On 2002-09-11 10:13, braincell wrote:
Bliss? What does bliss have to do with anything. If we were all happy surely nothing would ever get done.

Don't knock it till you've experienced it

at0m · Post by **at0m** » Wed Sep 11, 2002 1:32 pm

(OT)

braincell wrote to at0mic: I thought about Reason but would this be an advantage over the SFP?

No advantage, just taking remote on Reason too. I made Rebirth 2.01 presets, now I did some for Reason. I've included Mixer14:2, Redrum and Subtracktor co's I use them most. More, for efx etc, will come later probably. Note that this is remote for Reason and has nothing to do with Creamware. Just that I'm running Reason thru SFP...

-back on topic: Anyone seen "Requiem For a Dream"? It makes one think how we're all addicts. We need our freak. Doesn't matter if it's drugs, TV, music or sports. Can be anything. One's not better then the other, it's just how you use it.

samplaire · Post by **samplaire** » Wed Sep 11, 2002 2:05 pm

Requiem for a dream: it thrilled me and caused I asked myself a question if I'm an addict??? Sometimes it is difficult to see it oneself. there should be somebody to tell you about it. I think I am an adddict - I'm addicted to my computer. As everybody here I want my machine to be the best possible. But till it doesn't affect my family (it has grown to 3 persons from 1 lately this year) it isn't dangerous. Hough.

at0m · Post by **at0m** » Wed Sep 11, 2002 2:57 pm

As long as the rest of your life doesn't suffer from the addiction, you'll be fine

That's when creativity jumps in. One's addiction has great influences on his priorities. If someone is creative enough, he'll get away with anything. I mean if you can't do something, you'll search for alternatives to do it anyway but different, mainly to reduce negative consequences.

If someone who's not so creative gets in the same situation, he might not see a solution. He will less likely become an addict, cos he cannot deal with things when he's under influence. If this person does give in to the addiction, he will fail in many things. But probably he'll give up before it's that far. A persevering creative person can become addicted, cos he's free to explore a more profound direction of his addiction. And little is known about long-term drug use consequences. I'll let you know in 20yrs. =)

I say 'creative enough', but there's other built-in securities. Someone who gets severe hangovers will have very little chance to become alcoholic. He won't drink another one the next morning. Someone with 'better' physical conditions could have no hangover and feel fresh in the morning to go for another beer.

[ This Message was edited by: at0mic on 2002-09-11 16:01 ]

braincell · Post by **braincell** » Wed Sep 11, 2002 6:09 pm

"love is the drug I'm thinking of"

Surely nothing else can make you feel so good or so bad for so long...

mr swim:

Right On! Kool-aid isn't going to hurt anyone no matter what people think about it.

Post by **garyb** » Wed Sep 11, 2002 8:58 pm

On 2002-09-11 11:22, mr swim wrote:

(quote: Garyb)

etc.

i don't think you overstood(meaning that you "got" it in an overveiw as oppsed to
"understanding" which is more like being below something huge that you can't see completely..) my post.there is an earlier post with definitions.just because it's "natural" doesn't mean it's "safe"....just because it's artificial doesn't make it "bad".

i'm not ancient,but i'm old enuff to tell the younger brothers and sisters to keep the drugs on the down low.dig?

lots of things are fun that are a bad idea.one does not HAVE to follow every bad idea to have lived a worthwhile life....

i don't hate you if you like drugs either.i might not let you in my house depending on your current obsession,tho....(this is once more my experience talking,cause i told jimi "yes,not just stoned,but beautiful.....)"

ontik · Post by **ontik** » Wed Sep 11, 2002 9:51 pm

Nicked:.... I totally believe what you say RE Those from the US expect the bad experiences and get them. But I think that is cultural. Americans are generally more highly strung and their media has a more brainwashing effect leading them into believing that they will go completely insane if they so much as walk passed someone on drugs. Why? Because you ONLY ever hear negative drug stories. I'm guessing in Glasgow though, no matter how much media you were faced with, the number of upshot stories you hear so greatly outnumber what is seen in the media that the strength of the media's argument is reduce to nearly nothing. Thats kinda how it happens here in Melbourne.

And like yourself, I could count on both hands the number of people I see regularly who haven't had them. (Work colleagues excluded)

My belief is that any mind has the capablility to be stronger than many drugs and like yourself I have more experience with MDMA then anything else. The difference is based on whether or not you believe you are stronger than your drug of choice and its culture. You will know both of these people. The ones who submit themselves to a drug(s) and the associated culture and these are always the ones who destroy themselves family and so on. Then there are those who make recreational use a 'component' of who they are.

"Are you a part of the culture or is the culture a part of you?"

If anyone chooses not to believe this thinking then my response to you is that perhaps you are not strong enough of mind to be able to make recreational use apart of who you are. And thats FINE! Its fantastic that people are able to recognise that and make solid decisions based on that understanding. And that is different to 'choosing' not to becasue there are people who understand that they CAN do this but still choose not to use themselves.

I can't really tell any horror stories with regard to MDMA both personally and of those I know. The worst I could say is that I've had pills that have made me feel less that comfortable but never that have 'freaked me out' and again the same can be said of those I know. No Hospitalisations, no psychotic episodes etc etc..... No-one on some downward spiral. All have either reached the point they have set themselves for their lives or are on the way there with a vengance. No-one who could not stop themselves having a 'big night' when they now they have some important family/work function the following day etc. etc. It just doesn't happen.

So why is this different to what we are lead to believe in the media?? The strength of a mind to make what it wants to make happen, happen. When this desire is strong enough anything can be achieved.

This is so dependant on your social conditioning. What effect has your social conditioning had on your belief in yourself? With or without any discussion of drugs? Drugs are just another area where strength of mind effects the result.

I'm quite sure there will be many who disagree with this completely but so be it.

Post by **garyb** » Wed Sep 11, 2002 10:06 pm

we say that in the usa too!
i say one who sez its completely good OR completely bad is a liar.
i also say i advise against it,but do as you see fit.

youngsters.

ontik · Post by **ontik** » Thu Sep 12, 2002 12:33 am

How old are you Gary??

FTR I'm 30.

Post by **garyb** » Thu Sep 12, 2002 2:29 am

like i said,not ancient,but old enuff.i'm 40 my stepson is in his mid 20's my wife is just 50(in case you needed the info for the story above....)

i've done everything but needles and i've seen plenty of that,too.

recreational drug use is rarely a serious problem.(not everyone who drinks becomes a disfunctional alchoholic)it does take a toll tho..(and no,i really didn't feel it at 30

)

i really have found that music exists with or without augmentation,tho some substances do go well with it.

it is DEFINATELY cultural,(drug use)and if you really think that humans know what they're messing with these days,then you know what you're doing AND what you're doing here and it's all good.(far be it from me to dis you)

i'm not against substances that change conciousness.i do find conciousness to be VITAL and sacred and that it should be treated with respect and responsibility.(it's dangerous,it can take the form of stalin,bush,or bart simpson or even chopin.it can become an atom bomb to teach you a lesson or buhdda to give you guidance)

on the other hand,without a bunch of stoned-out music fans,it might be much harder for musicians to make a living.(old joke about the grateful dead-a fan sez"i stopped doing drugs and that band sucks!")

"talk,it's only talk!"

once more,as so many say,
cheers!
respect.

mr swim · Post by **mr swim** » Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:35 am

On 2002-09-11 21:58, garyb wrote:

i don't think you overstood(meaning that you "got" it in an overveiw as oppsed to
"understanding" which is more like being below something huge that you can't see completely..) my post.there is an earlier post with definitions.just because it's "natural" doesn't mean it's "safe"....just because it's artificial doesn't make it "bad".

i'm not ancient,but i'm old enuff to tell the younger brothers and sisters to keep the drugs on the down low.dig?

lots of things are fun that are a bad idea.one does not HAVE to follow every bad idea to have lived a worthwhile life....

i don't hate you if you like drugs either.i might not let you in my house depending on your current obsession,tho....(this is once more my experience talking,cause i told jimi "yes,not just stoned,but beautiful.....)"

I totally agree Gary. I definitely warn people against drugs. Especially mdma (although obviously there are other nasty / nastier ones, just less common). I have definitely noted a general change in the mental well-being of friends of mine who have done consistently large amounts of extasy over the last few years. There is actually medical evidence showing that large amounts of mdma can damage the serotonin gland (giving you less of your internal happiness drug) and also damage the hippocampus (long-term memory area). So as far as I'm concerned it is not evevn a case of 'wait and see' - but more 'there is evidence that mdma has harmful effects, and only anecdotal evidence that it does not'. i.e. it is more reasonable to believe that it is dangerous.

And Gary, i really didn't mean to contradict or offend you with my ramblings. I think we are more in agreement than not.

Retro · Post by **Retro** » Thu Sep 12, 2002 6:12 am

You guys are giving me flashbacks!

As I mentioned way back on page 1 of this thread, I had an experience with LSD that put me off the stuff completely. I just recalled that during that experience I had a cold. In retrospect I'm sure that was the cause of the bad trip I had, because up until then I had nothing but positive experiences.

I still don't think I'd try acid again, especially since I started experimenting with meditation, but I have to admit if someone offered me a joint in a social context I'd still smoke it. I'm also pretty sure I couldn't enjoy a rave like I used to without some MDMA. In line with what Ontik said, I know my limits with those two substances and I can almost guarantee myself a good time with them. I still wouldn't recommend any kind of drug to anyone else because we all have different reactions to them, for whatever reason. It's such a personal thing, and I guess that's why the media just can't touch it - being such a "blanket" form of communication.

Then again, maybe I'm just getting old before my time

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Thu Sep 12, 2002 7:17 pm

imho there are 2 completely different 'drug' uses or abuses (if you prefer):
the 'recreational' or 'creative' version which Gary describes with such appealing words, and the one where people stick to a complete addiction of crack or opiates.
To believe in strength of mind (and yourself)will effectively prevent you from joining group two (simply because you'll find that you don't deserve that shit).

But in some 'creative' experiments you'll suddenly stand without a mind.
Gary's story about the kids reads funny and it may look like if you watch someone doing diving exercises on the grass in the garden.
But it isn't fun anymore from fifth floor or if you try to stop a truck just by a push of your hands. This may happen any moment under the influence of that herb - any experiences are lost (or don't matter), you just act (hyperactively btw) so lots of chances to get you into trouble.
If LSD pulls the right switch in your head, that may stay for the rest of your life, but no first-time consumer can even imagine it.

The 'commonly' known drug abuse of junkies on the street is something completely different and not that tightly related to chemistry as always stated.
It's not the morphine that makes people addicted - it's their own mind.
They refuse to accept some kind of weakness or emptiness in their lives (and that one can do something against it) and want to be bold and cool. H gives that comfortable feeling and they actually feel quite well when handling life hazardous doses of drugs.
Subsitute no 1 for them is alcohol. Just something the easy way to dedicate an empty life to.
I'm not trying to play this down, it's actually a very sad story. I've seen many such cases and several friends died from this way of life. Many addicted never can leave that circle because they don't get a chance to alternative experiences.
You have to substitute the 'drug' with something real, related to your personal life, which makes you feel proud or whatever. Most therapies focus too much on the medical (chemistry) part.
An example: I've been smoking cigarettes for decades, needed my dayly package of Camel filterless.
I've traded this for fresh air (forgot over the years how good THAT smells) and a heavily increased physical condition in sports.
From time to time I enjoy a good cigar, but never experienced the run for cigarettes (just because of the nicotine) again.
It doesn't even need an effort - it's simply replaced. To be honest: the trigger was a severe flu one summer which really struck me down for a week.

To those concerned about cocaine in whatever form: it's quite toxic to nerve cells.
A good line has about the impact of 4 bottles of vodka to your brain. But you can't drink 8 bottles per hour continously over a night...

cheers, Tom

nicked · Post by **nicked** » Tue Sep 17, 2002 4:04 am

[/quote]
There is actually medical evidence showing that large amounts of mdma can damage the serotonin gland (giving you less of your internal happiness drug) and also damage the hippocampus (long-term memory area). So as far as I'm concerned it is not evevn a case of 'wait and see' - but more 'there is evidence that mdma has harmful effects, and only anecdotal evidence that it does not'. i.e. it is more reasonable to believe that it is dangerous.

[/quote]

not true. i am a biomedical scientist, i have read the research, and it is extremely inconclusive. the serotonin damge thing is based on rat experiments, where ONE researcher's opinion was that administering enormous doses (by body mass, orders of magnitude greater than the dose a human would take) of the drug repeatedly caused 'damage'. other researchers are of the opinion that his 'damage' was actually an artifact caused by the type of silver staining he used. as for the 'anecdotal evidence':

the number of people who have now been using mdma regularly for years probably runs into millions. this is a far larger group than the largest clinical trials. if prolonged mdma use caused any kind of chronic medical symptoms, a fairly large number of this group would now be presenting themselves to doctors. they are not.

the fact is, as far as toxicity is concerned, mdma is an extremely benign substance.