The moment you take a mind opening substances, you have changed you physical person. Thoughts are not independent of the tissue behind your eyes. I think it's the most beautiful poem that nature ever wrote. A plant so smart that it can change human behavior, not just to cultivate and take it more, but to alter the superstructure of societies. Change their concept of property, concept of self and other. It's so beautiful because we think it's voluntary. What arises is not a parasitic relationship, as it is with heroin or the like; it is mutualistic. It is a give and take to the benefit of both. But once you bite into the apple, there is no turning back.

Is it addiction in the traditional sense? no. My point is that we need to remain our own masters. Science can be twisted in numerous ways, as I have demonstrated here. Science can be your ally, but not when we reach into the realm of the metaphysical, when real human emotion is at stake. You will alienate (pun intended) anyone but those who choose to adopt your values. At the end of the day, this is the stuff that !$#@s you up just right. This is the stuff that breaks down boundaries, forms friendships, brings tears to your eyes, presses the God button. Just recognize that you didn't actually choose to do any of that.

That is what I am saying.

If I'm addicted to psychedelics I'm perfectly okay with that. I've been addicted to other substances in the past and they were terrible to come off of. Psychedelics aren't something that give me those horrible withdrawals, destroy my life, and make everyone who cares about me miserable and fearful for my life.

I'm obviously biased but I see your point. Just about anything that triggers such awe and joy could become an addiction.

My definition of an addiction is pretty simple. When you continue to do something even though you know you're harming yourself (and possibly others) and the negative consequences far outweigh the positive. I think in most cases psychedelic use doesn't tread into that kind of territory. Even if you use them more often than you probably should, you usually end up getting your butt kicked during a trip and decide to take some time away from them for a while.

If you're able to make that kind of decision without much effort than I would have to say that you're not an addict in the traditional sense.

1) None of these papers say that Psychedelics are Physically Addictive
2) None of these papers say that Psychedelics Have the Potential to be Physically Addictive
3) Addiction has not been observed with psychedelics in ~ 60 years, regardless of your theory.

Please do not troll here.

Dogmatic...Nuff sed!

Im sorry but thus far you haven`t `demonstrated` anything except exposing your personal speculations as facts and giving falacious interpretations of very isolated and unrelated experimental results.

It would have been so much more interesting and constructive way to go about this if instead of making wild claims and misleadingly using publication abstracts, you`d simply ask the question and invite people to a debate (for example "can psychedelics be addictive? I found this and this article and my reasoning is that this or that can happen. What do you think?" ).

This kind of logic you used is like: Addicted people have a brain.. Psychedelics act in the brain. Therefore, psychedelics make you addicted.

Correlation is not causation, for starters. Also you are missing a whole lot of other important variables (such as the well known mechanisms of addiction and how they differ from psychedelic pharmacology, subjective effects of psychedelics and how they can affect administration patterns, reinforcement models and presence of aversive effects etc).

Here`s a question for you: how comes animals don`t self administer psychedelics such as you see happening with the addictive substances like cocaine or heroin?


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih....pmc/articles/PMC2247373/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/398885

If you`re talking about ketamine or other dissociatives with NMDA antagonism, then yes, you do see addiction pattern happening and in animal studies they do self-administer those substances in the expected pattern. But those substances are significantly different pharmacologically than the classic 5HT2A agonists such as dmt, mescaline, psilocybin and LSD, and we do recognize this here in the Nexus.

Also you forgot to mention that psychedelics are used AGAINST drug addiction successfully in many cases

http://informahealthcare...0.3109/16066359609010756
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/186/6/457.short

This doesn`t mean these substances are free from risks, but as scientists and people here have known for years, this is related with dosage, set and setting. You can read the health and safety section here in the forum if you haven`t read yet, and suggest any change you think might actually help people who read it in the future. But unconstructive attitude with bad use of science and scare mongering are unwarranted.

Heavenly blue:

As far as i know none of the classic Psychadelics are addictive in any way shape or form, according to scientific research. In fact they are 'anti addictive' in most cases. I'm guessing that if you wanted them to be addictive, that you'd have to work pretty hard at doing so, lol!

I think I know what are you getting at... We do psychedelics because we like it, and often we only make spiritual justifications for allowing us to continue doing that... (is my interpretation correct?)

If this is what underlies your post, then I understand it - I also sometimes have a feeling that within psychedelic community it often is not cool to openly admit that we (often, prehaps not always) do it because we just like it, that it is fun and can be very enjoyable.

But still, I don´t think it is possible to explain this by terms of "physical addiction".

Most of us humans live to a routine. The deciding factor of any kind of action is wether it's aligned to a greater good or not.

I agree. But in the case of addictions to things like sex and gambling where you wouldn"t expect withdrawals like the shakes or vomiting/diorrhea(?) i have known people who gamble to feel low when they are trying to take a break from their habit. This, in turn has affected their physical well being (weight gain and hairloss, loss of libido).

A lot of addicts can see themselves as users but not addicts. It can be very difficult to percieve certain negative effects that one"s addiction has. Not just on themselves but on the people around them. It is only when you look back in hindsight that you realise what a complete idiot you had turned into. Maybe it is possible for some of us to become so engrossed in our psychedelic worlds that is both detrimental to ourselves and our loved ones. We just don"t see it that way.

I have spoken to members who have used DMT as an anti-depressent thereby self medicating (i like to do this too). I am also sure that i remember reading a post on here that said "if i don"t get my medicine each thursday it all goes pear shaped" (or words to that effect). When does self medication become addiction? I think it is when the use of something becomes a crutch rather than a tool. Whether it be heroin, sex, alcohol, gambling, motorbikes or psychedelics.

The word addiction has such negative connotations. Some addictions are more respectable than others. I think there are many addicts that have turned their "problems" into tools for self growth. Sex addicts can become porn stars, my gambing addict friend became a booky (it was beneficial for his self growth but not for many of the poor muppets that he profited from), addicted motorcyclists who self harm by falling off become racers and people who are addicted to collecting porcelain statues of animals turn it into a hobby. It all depends on the individual and the nature of the crutches that they are in need of.

That is all true hug46, and most definitely something to keep in mind here in the nexus!

But the point the OP was trying to make is not that psychedelics can be misused or that people can overuse them without realizing, the point he was trying to make is that psychedelics are physically addictive, and even (unconvincingly) argued how it would happen pharmacologically. This is the problematic aspect IMO.

I havent smoked spice in such a long time and yet im always still on here, reading, learning, seeing other peoples perspectives on life, problems, inspiration, and just generally enjoying being in the anonymous company of likeminded folk, your statement is irrelevant (to me) in that regard and I'm sure many others here too.



I have many that are and that arent, and they be changing everyday, whatever is profound to me is profound and I dont see a problem with that. If i go crazy on my guitar with effects and warping while on mushrooms am i fond of that moment cause of the mushrooms or the fact i love sound?

why not be fond of every day? why not make every day a memory to behold, however that is done

Perhaps I am addicted to life because I go to sleep every night waiting for the next awesome day

science and facts are one thing which i can respect but i think there is something far more inconceivable about the universe to be able to apply it to everything. Once again, just my opinion.

Well I for one will have to man up and admit that I am addicted to psychedelics...

I can't stop thinking about them. I can't stop philosophizing about them. Hell I read incessantly about them, keep up the latest research on them, even spend time thinking of new methods of delivery and extraction, but damned if I hardly ever actually do them any more.

So yes, I'm addicted to psychedelics, just not the actual physical effects of the drugs themselves...

I suppose it could be a function of my age.. I'm fast approaching 40 <gasp> and somehow seem to just enjoy the sober, calm state more than the far flung reaches of hyperspace, but for some damned reason thoughts of hyperspace are never far away. Get a couple of beers in me and you can be sure that I'm about to start talking about the psychedelics headspace and what it means, doesn't mean, or could mean. Psychedelics have essentially invaded every part of my life even though I rarely have the time, energy, and admittedly courage to do them any longer.

Addicted sure... I guess I am.

Peace

Yeah - I guess no one gets "hooked" on (i.e. physically addicted to) psychedelics.
But some people - including myself - seem to be pretty badly addicted spiritually

Agreed.

I think obsessed would be a better word to describe what joedirt said.

Psychedelics are connected to a lot of very interesting subjects such as consciousness, spirituality, art, ancient cultures, chemistry, pharmacology, biology, etc.. If you`re inclined to such subjects, I think it's natural to be obsessed or at least very interested in psychedelics, specially if there`s the added dimension that they have served for positive purposes in one's life. That by no means equates to `being addicted`, and it is often the case one may spend months or years without using these substances nor wanting to, and yet continue being fascinated by them.

I think it is important to question oneself in what ways psychedelics can potentiate self-development, and what are their potential dangers and how to deal with them. But being physically addicted is not amongst the things psychedelic users should be worried about.

Endlessness that's excellent well said

Great posts endlessness, I completely agree.

Heavenly Blue, obviously there is more behind our disagreement than my post count, as you suggested...Many people with less than a fifth of my post # don't agree that they are physically addicting.

If someone becomes obsessed with something, explain how the psychology of that obsession is somehow magically separate from everything else happening in your brain/body.


I think some appear to be getting the point, while others appear to be missing it.

I did not say that addiction = detriment. Addiction can = benefit. Such is the case with exercise and drinking a cup of tea each day.

When we elevate psychedelics to the stars, to some kind of infallible sacred realm, we can lose perspective. I am bothered when a large part of my person is defined by drug use. Choose whatever truth makes you the happiest. If you are happy with the state of your beliefs, you will not and should not listen to a word anyone says. I believe that what I have shared can provide a subset of individuals with the right tool set to be a well-adjusted working class person who uses psychedelics and views them under the same lens as other practices.

Obsession does not = physically addicting. I'm obsessed with reading...Does that mean i'm physically addicted to it? No. Does that mean obsession is somehow magically separated from the body/brain? no...Don't conflate the two terms.

I've yet to see anyone who seemed physically addicted to psychedelics, and the information we have about how they work in the brain supports this. By definition, you would see negative physical symptoms of withdrawal resulting from abrupt reduction in use if there was a physical dependence that developed. You seem to be talking about something else entirely.

Also, what "tools" are you providing people with, apart from just claiming they are physically addicting? Many of us know there are risks involved with psychedelics, that they are not a panacea or fix-all, and that other other practices also hold a lot of usefulness and go quite deep in their own right. This all has nothing to do with your original post though.

This is where I blatantly disagree. The word 'addiction' has such a negative connotation to it in our society. It implies that the behavior is detrimental to the individual and also the collective.

Being addicted to exercise can ruin your life just the same as a drug addiction can.

I think most would agree the term 'addiction' in the most oft understood manner cannot be beneficial in any sense.

But we're arguing semantics now.