[HN Gopher] When America first dropped acid
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       When America first dropped acid
        
       Author : jseliger
       Score  : 104 points
       Date   : 2024-01-22 15:12 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.newyorker.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.newyorker.com)
        
       | Deprogrammer9 wrote:
       | paywall blocked
        
         | degenerate wrote:
         | Better than commenting "paywall blocked" is to provide an
         | archive link: https://archive.is/vH7vF
        
           | spacebacon wrote:
           | I liked "like magic it is unlocked" better ;)
        
           | yieldcrv wrote:
           | they messed up by blocking icloud relay in an ill guided vpn
           | spam prevention implementation, archive.is useless
        
             | quickthrowman wrote:
             | And yet when I click the link, I can read the article.
        
               | spacebacon wrote:
               | I too can click the link and read the article. It's only
               | useless if I close my eyes.
        
               | yieldcrv wrote:
               | Oh it's not an infinite recaptcha loop anymore, ok glad
               | the implementation is a little better
        
               | h2odragon wrote:
               | That was a DNS problem with cloudflare.
               | 
               | It bit Mozilla users harder because Mozilla uses "DNS
               | over HTTPS" to cloudflare _itself_ , ignoring your system
               | DNS. There's a setting to change that but you have to
               | enter "DNS" in the "setting search" to get it.
        
         | latchkey wrote:
         | https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean
        
       | lemonberry wrote:
       | I take psychedelics a few times a year. I'm good with LSD once a
       | year and I'm ok skipping it. I enjoy low (not micro) doses of
       | mushrooms a few times each summer.
       | 
       | Both have been very good for my sobriety. They aren't for
       | everyone though.
       | 
       | Great to see this becoming mainstream. Sad to see the number of
       | charlatans and the industry has popped up around it.
       | 
       | I hope that we're able to safely get these substances to those
       | that need them.
        
         | ericmcer wrote:
         | The effects of low doses of mushrooms/MDMA make me wonder if we
         | have been going about it all wrong. You can easily take 20% of
         | the normal amount and have a pleasant and noticeable effect but
         | still be highly functional. It is like our "normal" dose for
         | those drugs is the equivalent of 6+ drinks, and the idea of
         | only having a beer or two is painted as a waste.
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | > The effects of low doses of _______ make me wonder if we
           | have been going about it all wrong
           | 
           | It's human nature to think that more is better. If a little
           | works, why not use more. There's a definite bit of
           | experimenting that should be done to see when more become
           | less effective. As a user, that's just part of the journey.
           | Then we have the marketing/sales view point where they just
           | want those numbers higher, but it actually makes to product
           | less but not in a way the marketing cannot overcome it. I
           | feel this way about the microbrewery movement with high
           | alcohol and hops=>IPA usage.
        
             | fragmede wrote:
             | melatonin is one where 1 mg works and 10 mg doesn't.
        
           | peebeebee wrote:
           | It's not the same though. A high dose can lead to life
           | altering insights. A low dose will just be a fun time.
           | 
           | Alcohol in higher doses isn't therapeutic. More than 4 beers
           | and any therapeutic effect alchohol could've had is now also
           | gone. :)
        
           | _fat_santa wrote:
           | Just this weekend I took a low dose of mushrooms and went to
           | a nightclub. I typically drink at these places so it was
           | interesting to take just mushrooms and zero booze.
           | 
           | It was quite fun at a low dose and gave a similar feeling to
           | being drunk without the downsides. After that experience if I
           | had to choose to go out and drink or go out and take a low
           | dose of mushrooms I'm definitely doing the latter.
        
           | anjel wrote:
           | Micro dosing psylocibe/psylocin on a regular basis puts your
           | heart valves at some risk of permanent damage in ways
           | occasional high dose use does not.
        
             | pennaMan wrote:
             | You got a reference to back that up?
        
               | babyshake wrote:
               | Yes, this is the first I've heard of this but I would be
               | interested in learning about it.
        
               | financltravsty wrote:
               | Psilocybin is a partial 5-HT2B receptor agonist. 5-HT2B
               | receptor agonism causes deposits of collagen in heart
               | valves (which will lead to valve disease). This is true
               | for LSD, MDMA, and psilocybin.
               | 
               | A note is that psilocybin is only a partial agonist, and
               | the dosages taken for micro-dosing may not be comparable
               | to something like fenfluramine (a drug which does cause
               | heart valve dysfunction for certain). There was a drug
               | nerds thread lying around on Reddit where the theoretical
               | receptor activations were compared. IIRC, psilocybin is
               | not a major risk, as long as you're not tripping every
               | day for months on end.
        
               | alan-hn wrote:
               | The risk comes from taking the 2b agonist regularly,
               | that's why it causes fibrosis. Not only is taking the
               | larger dose safer as long as there are no preexisting
               | cardiovascular issues but microdosing has been shown to
               | be no better than placebo
               | 
               | Microdoses also don't inspire hippocampal neurogenesis
               | whereas larger doses do
               | 
               | Microdosing is not only not beneficial but it may be
               | actively harmful
               | 
               | "...it is possible that chronic microdosing may carry a
               | risk of fibrosis and VHD, which should be assessed in
               | future studies. There is converging evidence that
               | simulation of the 5-HT2BR over several months may lead to
               | the development of fibrosis. Duration of intake plays a
               | major role in drug-induced VHD, even if the substance is
               | not taken daily (Connolly et al., 1997; Schade et al.,
               | 2007)."
               | 
               | https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/02698811231
               | 225...
        
               | ProjectArcturis wrote:
               | https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2022/04/13/safety
               | -fi...
        
           | midiguy wrote:
           | Microdoses have no real effect on me at best, and put me
           | totally on edge at worst. But I love a mild 1-2g trip. I
           | personally think the optimal dose is a mild tripping dose
           | (perhaps mid ~3.5g if you are experienced and are looking for
           | that kind of experience).
           | 
           | But at the end of the day, everyone reacts different. I don't
           | know if there is a point to characterizing what should be
           | 'normal' dosage. They are basically completely different
           | drugs with different uses at different doses.
        
           | huytersd wrote:
           | The common knowledge amongst enthusiasts is that shrooms have
           | a threshold below which you don't feel anything and I feel
           | like anecdotally I can vouch for that (though it's been a
           | long time and I can't exactly remember anymore).
        
           | reducesuffering wrote:
           | I've done it a few times. The 1.75g was one of the most
           | profound moments of my life and the .25g were just an
           | interesting night. Felt like a 20x difference to me.
        
           | EmilyHughes wrote:
           | For the psychedelics this is very true, I enjoy mostly low
           | doses. But I am not so sure about the MDMA. If I didn't have
           | enough to get "over the hill" it always felt it's about to
           | come on now but it never does it's just a very dissapointing
           | limbo state. Even worse, redosing after that won't get you
           | the full effect either for that night (maybe because some
           | serotonin was already depleted at that point).
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | > Sad to see the number of charlatans and the industry has
         | popped up around it.
         | 
         | This is (should have been) expected for any trending topic, but
         | especially something currently seen as taboo. We've seen CBD
         | and the 10000MG 1oz bottles. There will always be fraudsters
         | and scammers. It's just too easy for money to be made by people
         | that have no idea about the actual products, but it's not just
         | drug related. Just look at Amazon to see how prevalent it is,
         | and how accepted it has become
        
         | gardenhedge wrote:
         | Why bother?
        
       | graublau wrote:
       | America was introduced to LSD via CIA's MK-ULTRA program.
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MKUltra
       | 
       | 'to channel youth dissent and rebellion into more being and non-
       | threatening directions' - FBI internal memo
        
         | spacebacon wrote:
         | In hindsight counter culture (LSD being a component of this)
         | does seem to have been the response to heightened tensions
         | pushing us towards authoritarianism. Still relevant today.
        
         | Wonnk13 wrote:
         | I think the name of the book is Poisoner in Chief, it's a great
         | history of how Gottlieb ran that program and its impacts on
         | society.
        
         | ethanbond wrote:
         | I don't think your first claim is true. It was "introduced" by
         | psychiatrists and various philosophical zealots. MKULTRA
         | attempted to research it to see if it could be used for the
         | purpose you describe.
         | 
         | Without MKULTRA, LSD still hits the US and still causes some
         | cultural tremors.
        
           | bhk wrote:
           | "The LSD movement was started by the CIA. I wouldn't be here
           | now without the foresight of CIA scientists." -- Timothy
           | Leary
           | 
           | Subproject 6 of MK-ULTRA involved funding Eli Lilly to
           | develop its own synthesis of LSD. The CIA embarked on this to
           | ensure an adequate supply after finding that Sandoz had
           | produced only 40 grams total of LSD. After Lilly succeeded,
           | the CIA became the main customer, and via various other
           | subprojects funded and supplied researchers that experimented
           | with LSD.
           | 
           | In particular, many counterculture figures first encountered
           | LSD as subjects of CIA-backed experiments, including Ken
           | Kesey, Allen Ginsberg, and Grateful dead lyricist Robert
           | Hunter.
           | 
           | Timothy Leary himself was one step removed, being introduced
           | to psychedelics by a fellow Harvard researcher whose research
           | into magic mushrooms was CIA-funded.
           | 
           | [this is all discussed in Kinzer's "Poisoner in Chief"]
           | 
           | Without the CIA it might have taken decades longer.
        
       | thinkingtoilet wrote:
       | I'm curious to see how many people have access to mushrooms these
       | days. For my 20s and 30s it seemed impossible to get, now all of
       | a sudden I can get them no problem. I have a friend who is not
       | into drugs at all but grows them, weighs them, and has a pill
       | making machine to make pills so he can accurately micro-dose to
       | address severe depression. I have other friends who love drugs
       | and can get the literally anytime they want. It's shocking that
       | they are so available now compared to even 5 years ago. Anyone
       | else experiencing this?
        
         | newsclues wrote:
         | I smoke weed so it's always been easy to find acid or shrooms,
         | but now people openly advertise it (I'm Canadian)
        
         | Wonnk13 wrote:
         | So I'm a stage 4 cancer patient and now there's a real fire
         | under my ass to do a heroic dose. I talked to my therapist
         | about it and he was like yea, here's this website where you can
         | order some chocolate bars. My jaw hit the floor. I thought he
         | was referencing the darkweb, but nope just a typical site in
         | Canada I think.
         | 
         | I'm still incredibly new to it all and would love to grow my
         | own at one point. I'd also love to know where _ahem_ folks are
         | sourcing their stuff.
        
           | quchen wrote:
           | Germany: Spores are legal in Austria (maybe also
           | Netherlands?). Then search Uncle Ben's Tek online.
           | 
           | You can also grow legal mushrooms like this, King Oysters in
           | my case. It's a wonderful project teaching you a lot. Start
           | to finish it's about 20 hours of work spanning 2 months.
        
             | RamblingCTO wrote:
             | Spores are illegal in Germany. But just buy a growkit from
             | the Netherlands, if you're terminally ill in Germany,
             | chances are that law enforcement won't even start
             | processing before you're dead.
             | 
             | PS: awesome tip!
        
               | quchen wrote:
               | > Spores are illegal in Germany
               | 
               | So are growkits, but spores are easier to transport (in a
               | syringe suspended in water, or on aluminium foil).
               | Problem with growkits is that it takes a while to see
               | whether you've got a good (or contaminated) one, and
               | yield isn't that high.
               | 
               | Main options:
               | 
               | - (Learning, qulity) Start from spores (syringe or dry):
               | do this to learn a lot, and also to have something to eat
               | afterwards. It was one of my most valuable projects ever.
               | Spores go into petri dish, then search for Uncle Ben's.
               | Two months starting from zero.
               | 
               | - (Learning, quality, faster) Clone a living part: get
               | your hands on mycelium or a fresh fruiting body (possibly
               | also a sclerotium AKA truffle), which consists of
               | mycelium as well (the >>fruit<< is the same material as
               | the >>tree<< for fungi, I digress but this is so
               | interesting). Put into agar petri dish, let it grow, and
               | search for Uncle Ben's. (I did this with store-bought
               | King Oysters.) Roughly 2 weeks faster than the spore
               | process because you're skipping the selection-and-
               | transfer phase, and thus also contamination risk.
               | 
               | - (No learning, genome+contamination gambling, fastest)
               | Growkit: don't have experience with this, but I've heard
               | that they often don't work because they're contaminated.
               | I have no practical experience here.
        
               | grey8 wrote:
               | I used a Growkit with no experience at all; and it worked
               | beautifully. YMMV.
               | 
               | The yield is "not as big", right, but it's still more
               | than you can reasonably consume. I don't quite remember,
               | but I think three flushes yielded ~50g (dry) or so out of
               | one small Growkit. Two big glass jars full.
               | 
               | I want to do it again out of enjoyment for the grow
               | process alone. It's really fun watching these things
               | grow!
        
           | flerchin wrote:
           | Sorry about the cancer. What's the idea behind a heroic dose?
        
             | csa wrote:
             | If my understanding is correct, it helps with coming to
             | terms with imminent mortality.
        
               | Wonnk13 wrote:
               | Yes exactly. Basically trying to replicate some of the
               | clinical trials in my bedroom lol.
        
           | kamranjon wrote:
           | Oregon has stores now that sell everything you need to grow
           | your own. Pre-sterilized substrate bags with injection ports
           | and many different strains of psychedelic mushrooms sold in
           | spore syringes. You basically just stick it in a closet,
           | inject it and it will just do its thing - in a few weeks you
           | will have pounds of mushrooms.
           | 
           | There are more than one of these stores in my city - wouldn't
           | be surprised if it was happening in many other cities on the
           | west coast as well.
        
           | h2odragon wrote:
           | They're easy to grow. I can highly recommend these folks:
           | https://sporeworks.com/
           | 
           | I used to do "too much" doses and go running the hills with
           | the hounds, back when. They're a great thing; but like all
           | good things they can be overindulged.
           | 
           | probably got an ounce or two under alcohol in the freezer
           | still; haven't felt the need to dip into that for a decade.
        
           | scyzoryk_xyz wrote:
           | Look up Portland Psychedelic Society videos about how it
           | works. It's super easy as a hobby. You buy the spores or the
           | substrate online. Also super easy. Grow-boxes should
           | basically be legal for your purposes.
           | 
           | Sounds like it very much is about time. If I were you I would
           | also just splurge and seek out a solid ayajuaska experience
           | somewhere in that other America down there. Good luck
        
           | ParanoidShroom wrote:
           | Shroomery has all the information in the world or just
           | youtube. Spore tend to be legal in many places, then buy
           | sterilised kits and inject, its really easy. You can do it
           | all yourself for a bit less money but then you'll see tricky
           | grain infections can be.
           | 
           | >heroic dose. imho they arent worth it, im making assumption
           | regarding the cancer but you might benefit more from an
           | actual `ceremony`. Not to get spiritual but they are more
           | guided, a guided ayahuasca ceremony might be less intense but
           | I personally think would be a better fit.
           | 
           | Hope you'll be fine.
        
           | thinkingtoilet wrote:
           | DO NOT just go and do a heroic dose on your own if you are
           | not VERY experienced.
        
             | dumpsterdiver wrote:
             | Agreed. Definitely calibrate your internal register for
             | "this is what taking mushrooms feels like" using a low
             | dose. IMO it's especially important to familiarize yourself
             | with the anxiety / exhaustion that can occur as the drug
             | takes effect.
             | 
             | I've always considered myself someone who can "maintain
             | their shit" pretty well on drugs (granted, I rarely do
             | drugs recreationally, my mushroom schedule is maybe once or
             | twice a year these days). The few times I've hit a bit of
             | turbulence has always been on the come-up or come-down. For
             | mushrooms the comedown has always been smooth for me, but
             | going up I've noticed a vague sense of anxiety until the
             | full wave hits.
        
           | TSiege wrote:
           | Please do it with an experienced friend! High doses like that
           | can be really jarring for your first time if you're not in a
           | good location with someone who knows how to remain chill on
           | them
        
           | huytersd wrote:
           | Eh, I've done it a dozen times and it was amazing every time
           | except the last one when I was expecting some bad news in the
           | near future. If I did shrooms with my death looming, I feel
           | like I might have lost my mind. Be careful, though I guess
           | you don't have a lot to lose. If I were you, I would go the
           | stimulant (amphetamine) and opiate route since it's a lot
           | more easily accessible fun and will probably help you
           | mentally cope with this period better.
        
         | AndrewKemendo wrote:
         | Availability is cultural
         | 
         | If you grew up around cattle country in Texas they are
         | literally growing out of cow shit everywhere
         | 
         | It's effectively decriminalized in the US at this point
         | 
         | Now that people realize that it's better medicine than what
         | pharmaceutical companies are producing they are adjusting their
         | consumption
        
         | wahnfrieden wrote:
         | Toronto has dozens of stores (with huge colorful signs,
         | expensive ground floor storefronts, ads all over the city,
         | people handing out leaflets) openly selling them in the
         | downtown core despite it being completely illegal
        
         | giraffe_lady wrote:
         | The "uncle ben tek" has been around a decade or more now and
         | that really changed the accessibility of it. It uses shelf
         | stable ready-to-eat (fully cooked, sterilized) rice as the
         | medium for inoculation.
         | 
         | It dramatically reduces the difficulty and risk of what used to
         | be the main failure point in the process. Now for $200 of gear
         | and the complexity of a weekend baking project you can just do
         | the whole thing yourself.
         | 
         | Anecdotally I've also seen a lot of people pick up this
         | skill/"hobby" the last few years. I really think the
         | accessibility of this technique is what's driving the increased
         | availability.
        
           | __MatrixMan__ wrote:
           | Huh, I've been using PF tek as a starter for grain beds,
           | never heard of uncle ben. I'll look into that.
           | 
           | It's a fun hobby. It motivated me to go back to school and
           | pursue a biology degree. I think there's a lot we can learn
           | from fungus, and not even in some kind of spiritual mumbo
           | jumbo way, they're just better than we are at a lot of tasks
           | (e.g. if you want to talk about 9's of availability,
           | mycorrhizal networks are way ahead of us: they don't tend
           | towards single points of control/failure like we do).
        
             | giraffe_lady wrote:
             | If you have the process and technique down you might end up
             | just sticking with what you're using. My understanding is
             | the benefit of uncle ben is its reliability for beginners,
             | not so much yield or quality. I think there are also newer
             | & better variants of it anyway? But yeah look around.
             | 
             | So yeah, fungus. Funny enough I pretty much only grow koji
             | and some other food molds. I like to talk shop with
             | mushroom growers though. The techniques are really
             | different but we share a lot of experiences and... mindset.
             | People end up with an almost spiritual admiration for the
             | mold. Which is self-evident for psilocybes of course, but
             | koji growers seem to develop it too.
        
               | quchen wrote:
               | > My understanding is the benefit of uncle ben is its
               | reliability for beginners, not so much yield or quality.
               | 
               | This.
               | 
               | - You get sterilized substrate, which requires special
               | equipment to produce on your own (large enough pressure
               | cooker, mainly).
               | 
               | - Sterilizing rye is a bit of an art. Not too mushy, not
               | too hard, properly sterilized, get the moisture right.
               | Might take a couple of attempts.
               | 
               | - Financial investment is negligible either way.
               | 
               | - You're hedging your contamination bets with 200g packs,
               | because creating lab conditions at home isn't that easy.
               | (Plenty of tutorials claim it is, and then show you their
               | special mushroom tent, which you won't recognize as a
               | beginner, and then you wonder why you've got orange fluff
               | a month later.)
        
         | thow16161 wrote:
         | Yes, they've gotten easier.
         | 
         | There are mushroom based gummies available in local smokeshops
         | due to some loophole in the that this particular strain of
         | shrooms is not explicitly illegal.
         | 
         | My gf just got into shrooms. She started getting them from her
         | weed dealer. His shrooms were overpriced, and hit or miss
         | quality. Then we ran into a girl with a shroom hat at a
         | festival, and it turns out she's a great source. Selling
         | shrooms is her primary source of income. She makes little vegan
         | shroom "cookies" (which are more like fudge), and also sells
         | raw shrooms. She's a licensed massage therapist, and seems to
         | launder the income by charging you for a massage.
        
           | quchen wrote:
           | > hit or miss quality
           | 
           | Psiloc(yb)in content varies a lot among fruiting bodies of
           | the same batch, genome, flush, hell even within the same
           | cluster (example papers [1][2]). So even for known/good
           | sources I would suggest mixing at least a couple of fruiting
           | bodies to have something known and repeatable. Since powder
           | degenerates faster, honey is a good water/air/light free
           | preservative.
           | 
           | [1]: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17401967/ [2]: https://w
           | ww.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/037887...
        
           | Clamchop wrote:
           | I don't believe there's a loophole, if you're talking about
           | the US. There are indeed mushroom products in smoke shops,
           | but they're amanitas. The effects are much more mild.
           | 
           | Psylocybin and psylocin are Schedule I wherever they occur.
           | 
           | The only practical loophole is spores, which can be sold for
           | research purposes, though not in all states, and are illegal
           | to germinate anywhere. Still, many online outfits sell and
           | ship liquid culture (mycelium suspended in liquid), which is
           | illegal but it appears nobody cares too much.
        
           | yonaguska wrote:
           | If you're in IL, I believe I know this person.
        
         | __MatrixMan__ wrote:
         | I've never had a hard time finding them. You could always just
         | order spores online if you didn't know a guy. But now that it's
         | not a crime to possess them where I live (Colorado) I'm a
         | little less reserved about talking about it. The terrarium is
         | out of the closet, and that's a recent change.
        
       | ldjkfkdsjnv wrote:
       | Recently read a description of 1960's ideology. The claim being
       | that its all propaganda, and what we know as 60s ideology (peace
       | love etc) actually never really happened for a real duration of
       | time. What did happen was that those that prescribed to that line
       | of thinking either moved to communes, or they dropped so much
       | acid they were societally irrelevant. There werent many people
       | actually out and about that were pushing those lines of thinking,
       | the ideology died within a year or two, but mass media keeps it
       | alive.
       | 
       | Weird to think about how media can amplify a set of ideas, that
       | itself didnt last very long. We keep having this renewed
       | consciousness of ideas, like a microphone blowing it into
       | everyones ears. Even funnier is to think that an ideology that
       | hates mass media (anti corporate 60s culture) may actually just
       | be a product of mass media, much like mickey mouse.
        
         | germinalphrase wrote:
         | Unless we are defining that "ideology" very narrowly, the sheer
         | volume of cultural output (fashion, music, cinema, etc) would
         | be a clear counterpoint.
        
           | ldjkfkdsjnv wrote:
           | How long did that period last? It died very fast, and was
           | really only 5 years at maximum. Probably not much longer than
           | the time that covid started until now. A flash in the pan.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | The lingering effects might very well last longer than the
             | actual event itself though. Hell, the effects of LSD last
             | much much longer than the drug itself lasts in the body. So
             | to me, you're harping on the wrong thing. Sure, maybe the
             | movement lasted a short time, but the mindset is still out
             | there
        
             | moelf wrote:
             | 1960s is only 10 years so if something went on in the
             | public mind day on and day off for 5 years (like COVID did
             | for 3 years), I think it's a good candidate for the decade-
             | defining theme
        
             | frutiger wrote:
             | There's a related occurrence of the same principle -- we
             | have had movies/stories about the wild west for longer than
             | the archetype frontier period existed.
        
           | mrangle wrote:
           | Cultural output pushed by media, continuously and inarguably
           | well after the movement ended?
           | 
           | If there's one thing that's clear beyond all else involved in
           | the topic of popular culture, it's that the media chooses
           | what culture to push and what to ignore.
        
             | at_a_remove wrote:
             | I think that the "Mondo" films played a part.
             | 
             | For those not in the know, Mondo films (that's usually the
             | start of the title, like _Mondo Freudo_ ) gathered together
             | very disparate samples of different slices of life, with a
             | heavy emphasis on the titillating, the criminal, the
             | bizarre, not to mention almost anything that might be
             | numbered among the counterculture, and presented them in a
             | vaguely documentary-like format. How much was staged, how
             | much wasn't? Still, aside from the almost obligatory
             | nudity, you got a very strong feeling of "look at the
             | strange stuff _these_ people get up to! "
             | 
             | My guess is that they had kind of an outsized impact for
             | what seemed like half "nudie cuties" of the 50s married to
             | a casual National Geographic feel of different cities in
             | Europe, the United States, and associated territories.
        
         | chimeracoder wrote:
         | > The claim being that its all propaganda, and what we know as
         | 60s ideology (peace love etc) actually never really happened.
         | What did happen was that those that prescribed to that line of
         | thinking either moved to communes, or they dropped so much acid
         | they were societally irrelevant.
         | 
         | This sounds like something you'd read in a pop psychology book,
         | not an actual piece of historical analysis.
         | 
         | Given the visible cultural impact that the "ideology" (to use
         | your word) had, and the sheer number of artifacts we have to
         | attest to that, it's almost impossible to imagine how this
         | claim could be substantiated.
         | 
         | Ironically, the only thing in that that's close to a correct
         | statement is the line about communes and acid, which were
         | actually a very small part of the "ideology" that you're
         | referring to, and relatively rare, but which were amplified in
         | public perception due to media portrayals.
        
           | ldjkfkdsjnv wrote:
           | No this opinion comes from Academia. A large volume of media
           | was created in a very short time, and then essentially
           | disappeared/stopped production over night
        
             | kamranjon wrote:
             | You say this but having an actual source would be great.
        
               | mistermann wrote:
               | LSD is a hell of a drug, but it's nothing compared to
               | consciousness + culture.
        
             | revscat wrote:
             | This is an incredibly difficult position to defend, and I
             | would challenge you to do so.
        
           | ericmcer wrote:
           | Couldn't we make the same claim about all polarized views
           | (both right and left) that the media love to amplify today,
           | but not many people actually hold?
        
         | feedforward wrote:
         | There's almost universal opinion on the mainstream, left and
         | right that a cultural shift happened in the US between
         | Eisenhower leaving office and Woodstock. It's not some
         | narrative invented and pushed out.
         | 
         | The media does manufacture narratives. Youth in New York and
         | San Francisco had a subculture in the 1950s which was framed as
         | beatnik, and soon sitcoms were mocking beatnik. Small basement
         | performance places would have patrons not clap to avoid noise
         | complaints, so patrons would snap their fingers as applause.
         | This was then presented as something unusual and pretentious,
         | minus its original context. The same thing with San Francisco
         | hippies - they arose organically, the mainstream culture took
         | notice of them and presented them a certain way, and the cycle
         | goes on.
         | 
         | Every social movement that arises is met with an attempt to
         | coopt and to commodity by the corporate media and corporate
         | America, this has happened for a long time.
        
           | altairTF wrote:
           | In the same way, Woodstock '99 broke all that was left of the
           | mainstream hippie movement, giving rise to the new metal one
        
             | zoklet-enjoyer wrote:
             | Metal hippies? Is that a thing? I'm more familiar with the
             | 2010s hippy festival goers eating mushrooms and research
             | chemicals while listening to a combination of jam bands and
             | various electronic genres
        
               | altairTF wrote:
               | Sorry, Nu metal. It was more in the sense of the hippie
               | movement falling out of mainstream for good around the
               | 00's, at least on my view of the world, of course
        
           | CPLX wrote:
           | If you want to read a _very_ smart book that really digs into
           | this concept may I recommend:
           | 
           | https://www.amazon.com/Conquest-Cool-Business-
           | Counterculture...
        
             | morelisp wrote:
             | Also recommended: https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book
             | /chicago/F/bo377360...
        
         | elsjaako wrote:
         | I love the way Hunter S. Thompson described it. I'll strip it a
         | bit for brevity, but the whole book (Fear and Loathing in Las
         | Vegas) is worth reading.
         | 
         | San Francisco in the middle sixties was a very special time and
         | place to be a part of. Maybe it meant something. Maybe not, in
         | the long run . . . but no explanation, no mix of words or music
         | or memories can touch that sense of knowing that you were there
         | and alive in that corner of time and the world.
         | 
         | ...
         | 
         | So now, less than five years later, you can go up on a steep
         | hill in Las Vegas and look West, and with the right kind of
         | eyes you can almost see the high-water mark--that place where
         | the wave finally broke and rolled back."
        
           | takoid wrote:
           | Another relevant quote from Fear and Loathing that was posted
           | on HN a little over a week ago by isoprophlex:
           | 
           |  _... a generation of permanent cripples, failed seekers, who
           | never understood the essential mystic fallacy of the Acid
           | Culture: the desperate assumption that somebody - or at least
           | some force - is tending the light at the end of the tunnel._
        
         | nyolfen wrote:
         | the actual impact of the 60s counterculture was that the
         | hegemonic mainstream culture had its legitimacy broken -- but
         | it was not replaced by the counterculture, or anything else
        
         | morelisp wrote:
         | One thing which immediately reveals the lie in this is that it
         | pretends the counterculture was the only thing going on in the
         | 60s and ignores the New Left, Civil Rights movements, various
         | arts movements, the cementing of the MIC, the rise of the PMC,
         | etc etc. The 60s were a massive rupture and while it's true the
         | counterculture wasn't the only influence its bizarre to say it
         | didn't really exist to any extent.
        
           | CPLX wrote:
           | And beginnings of the labor market having its back broken of
           | course.
        
             | morelisp wrote:
             | IMO that's concomitant with the PMC since it's the concrete
             | moment workers stop thinking of themselves as workers and a
             | big paycheck is sufficient to make people class-dumb, but I
             | know that's a contentious view.
        
         | asveikau wrote:
         | I disagree, but ignoring this somewhat, I offer this:
         | 
         | One remarkable thing is how the hippie stuff often induced by
         | chemical manipulation of serotonin receptors mirrors a lot of
         | religious messages. You can take slogans like "peace on earth,
         | love your neighbor, love is all you need" and say, is that
         | hippie stuff? Or is it, say... The message attributed to Jesus?
         | In that sense, you don't really need the drugs or
         | counterculture to come up with that. It's been an authentic
         | part of history before. Nor can it totally be dismissed as only
         | coming from drug culture, or a brief source for a small moment
         | in time. We've had similar movements and ideas become popular
         | before. I'd go one step further and call it objectively a good
         | thing.
        
           | matrix87 wrote:
           | Maybe because psychedelics wake up the part of the human
           | psyche that understands religion
        
             | nwiswell wrote:
             | That doesn't seem right.
             | 
             | I think of the brain as a "rationalization machine". It
             | observes environmental inputs, and reflexively seeks to
             | ascribe a _cause_ for those inputs. In so doing, a causal
             | model of the world is constructed (whether accurate or
             | not), allowing the agent to make intelligent decisions
             | about what actions to take in order to produce desired
             | outcomes.
             | 
             | What hallucinogenic drugs tend to do is overwhelm the brain
             | with sensory inputs that are _sui generis_ and cannot be
             | folded neatly into a pre-existing causal model of reality,
             | but that are so numerous that they cannot simply be
             | ignored.
             | 
             | So the "protective mechanism" of the brain, rather than
             | abandoning or risking damage to this highly valuable causal
             | model of reality, is to shunt these experiences over into
             | an "other" category of mystical and religious significance.
             | The fact that these experiences are inexplicable, rather
             | than being an indication of any "malfunction" in the brain
             | which might prompt us to doubt our perception in general,
             | is instead proof of their cause: the incomprehensible
             | divine.
             | 
             | This isn't academic, just my 2c.
        
               | matrix87 wrote:
               | At the end of the day, you can either see a beautiful
               | thing and share it with a bunch of people. Or you can see
               | an ugly mechanistic thing and think that you're smarter
               | than the people seeing the beautiful thing
               | 
               | I don't think whichever one you see is a choice either,
               | more like the yanny vs laurel thing
               | 
               | At one point I made the same argument you make. Now I
               | don't see it that way. And I feel much better honestly
        
               | nwiswell wrote:
               | For what it's worth, I don't think it's ugly.
               | 
               | I think you're right that it's a personality thing, maybe
               | connected to how strong the "rationalization drive" is? I
               | don't know.
               | 
               | I guess I'd rather tickle the rationalizing side of my
               | brain with a rationalizination of the tendency to stop
               | rationalizing rather than just stop rationalizing :)
        
               | mensetmanusman wrote:
               | At least we know rationalization is not possible without
               | free will!
        
               | asveikau wrote:
               | > highly valuable causal model of reality,
               | 
               | It's important to not become too confident in this
               | either. Our perception of that is as you say useful but
               | also subjective and flawed, and I think if you get down
               | to pure materialism, it's harder to pin down than you may
               | think.
               | 
               | Even something basic which seemingly we all agree on at a
               | basic level and require to function, trying to answer
               | questions like "what is time?", you quickly can end up
               | with mind bendy examples from physics where the intuitive
               | understanding falls apart.
        
             | mock-possum wrote:
             | That would require that religion exists outside of human
             | experience, to be discovered and understood and awoken to -
             | which is a nice story, but not strictly true.
             | 
             | There is no religion, outside of what we imagine. We made
             | it up. It isn't like the water cycle, it's not something
             | just waited to be discovered by humans who know how to look
             | for it. Religion is fantasy.
        
           | Workaccount2 wrote:
           | There is a not insignificant amount of evidence pointing to
           | psychedelics as playing an outsized role in the formation of
           | religions.
           | 
           | A shaman brewing a mystical drink that gives you visions of
           | supernatural forces is pretty convincing evidence of a god(s)
           | to your any 2000 B.C. person. How else could you explain such
           | a trip while having no concept of chemicals much less
           | neurochemistry.
        
             | ethanbond wrote:
             | Alternatively you can also meditate/pray your way to
             | similar states as the ones psychedelics induce. It takes a
             | ton of practice, but I was able to generate very notable
             | open-eyed hallucinations after just 2 years of low-
             | intensity meditative practice (roughly equivalent to 120ug
             | of LSD).
             | 
             | It is totally believable that a true religious zealot would
             | be able to achieve much, much more with decades of
             | practice.
        
               | QuercusMax wrote:
               | Ram Dass told the story about how he visited the guru
               | Neem Karoli Baba (AKA Maharaj-ji) and gave him a bunch of
               | LSD, which supposedly had no effect on the guru because
               | he was already having open-eye hallucinations from his
               | meditation.
               | 
               | https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/baba-
               | ram-da...
               | 
               | Probably BS, but matches with what you say.
        
             | asveikau wrote:
             | It's an interesting theory that I've heard before, and I
             | think it did probably play a role at least some of the
             | time, but I think we need to be cautious about attributing
             | too much to it. I think people who have interest in drugs
             | often may get excited about this idea and push it a little
             | far.
             | 
             | My point is you don't necessarily need chemical inducement
             | to start or sustain the idea. Centuries of religious people
             | believed in transcendent consciousness at times in history
             | where they demonstrably had no access to drugs. You don't
             | need to partake to be moved by John Lennon's _all you need
             | is love_ either; a lot of the people listening did not. And
             | part of our cultural norms have these ideas baked in, with
             | or without drugs.
        
             | satellite2 wrote:
             | Fever will also cause hallucinations.
             | 
             | And in the three main monotheist religions formation
             | stories there is a good amount of time spent/lost in the
             | desert.
        
             | TaylorAlexander wrote:
             | It's pretty convincing evidence to a 2000 A.D. person too!
        
         | kingkawn wrote:
         | This is such an absurd overgeneralization of the cultural lives
         | of millions of people
        
         | bratwurst3000 wrote:
         | The French Revolution was also 4 years btw and nearly anybody
         | involved in it that did matter was killed. Still it has a
         | profound effect on society to that time And maybe to today.
         | 
         | My opinion is also that it is more amplified then justified
         | part of the 60s. The more important part was the social
         | revolution and not the sexual revolution. The sexual revolution
         | was more the pill. People did fuck before.
        
         | mynameishere wrote:
         | They're selling hippy wigs in Woolworths, man.
        
         | renewiltord wrote:
         | To be honest, if you've used psychedelics, you'll know many
         | people have that experience. I definitely have that over-
         | encompassing all-is-one feeling. To be honest, it feels like a
         | lower level of consciousness, less sophisticated, that is just
         | making connections between random things.
        
       | photochemsyn wrote:
       | Depending on how you define America, use of psychedelics goes
       | back a bit further than the 20th century, or the arrival of
       | Europeans. For example, here's a nice overview of the history of
       | mescaline, the active ingredient in peyote cactus:
       | 
       | https://medicalhealthhumanities.com/2019/09/17/from-the-dese...
        
       | latchkey wrote:
       | I recently ran out of gummies. Thanks to things being legal now,
       | I just went to the handy Eaze website to do an order.
       | 
       | $70 of goods + $30 in taxes and fees.
       | 
       | Is this what libertarians mean by "taxation is theft?"
        
         | ijhuygft776 wrote:
         | https://tor.taxi
        
       | dang wrote:
       | This is the book of Hacker News's own
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=benbreen!
       | 
       | All: please let's discuss the specifics of _this_ article--there
       | 's a lot there, and it will be much more interesting than the _n_
       | th generic thread about psychedelics. Specifics beat generics on
       | HN.
        
       | throwaway_ls wrote:
       | I was suffering from really bad loneliness and depression. I
       | caught wind that friends I wasn't particularly close with were
       | having an LSD retreat. I was raised that all 'hard' drugs were
       | bad and potentially addictive. But I decided to join them and to
       | try it.
       | 
       | It turned out to be an transformative experience for me. And it
       | wasn't from the LSD itself, the dose was too low to impact my
       | brain in a lasting way. But it's helped me connect with others
       | better in a more 'intimate' setting and build more meaningful
       | relationships. It's been over a year and I've done it a few times
       | since and each time it's been a great experience with others.
       | That's the TLDR of my experience.
        
         | bowsamic wrote:
         | My experience was sadly the opposite and it greatly exacerbated
         | my depression and invented the thought of suicide in my mind.
         | It's hard because there are many people online who get angry at
         | any mention of negative outcomes, but I have to share my side
         | of the story too. Thankfully it is slowly improving, but it has
         | been quite a ride since then. Maybe exactly what I needed? But
         | can't say those 5 years weren't absolute Hell
        
       | ProllyInfamous wrote:
       | Referenced in the article, Michael Pollen's 2018 "How to Change
       | Your Mind" book is wonderfully written [1]. I read this right
       | after reading Gabriel Mate's "Chasing the Scream" [tl;dr:
       | addiction is a mental problem, not judicial]. Pollen's level-
       | headed approach to the silly topic of entheogen exploration
       | reminded me that I am just a simple chemical meatbag.
       | 
       | Reading the article, I am reminded of my humanness.
       | 
       | [1] Check out Pollen's "Botany of Desire" about plants (THC
       | included) controlling humans. IMHO it's the author's best title.
        
       | enonimal wrote:
       | "When they permitted you to mount your father's throne, it was
       | only on the assurance that you'd keep the spice flowing."
        
       | benbreen wrote:
       | Author of the book under review here. AMA!
       | 
       | One thing I thought would be helpful is to link to the YouTube
       | video described in the opening paragraph:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMF-cyHAaSs
       | 
       | It's from a 1957 CBS documentary series called "Focus on Sanity"
       | that featured interviews with Aldous Huxley and Gerald Heard,
       | among others. I found it fascinating and my questions about it
       | were actually one of the motive forces for why I wrote the book.
       | 
       | I believe the recording was first brought to public attention by
       | Don Lattin, whose books _The Harvard Psychedelic Club_ (2010) and
       | _Distilled Spirits_ (2012) are both great.
        
         | galenmarchetti wrote:
         | What does your writing process look like when you set out to
         | write an entire book? I know a lot of HN users have blogs, but
         | the idea of writing a whole book seems daunting. Would love to
         | hear the details of your experience and what it looked like
         | particularly for Tripping on Utopia
        
           | benbreen wrote:
           | I wouldn't recommend my process to anyone, to be honest! I
           | probably wrote a total of around 200k words over a four year
           | period, of which I ended up cutting around 110k. I find it to
           | be very true that you don't know what you actually want to
           | say until you start writing things that _aren 't_ what you
           | want to say. Then it's an iterative process of critiquing,
           | rethinking, and starting over. I'm sure some people are able
           | to start with a clear outline and then just plow through to
           | the end, but I'm not one of them.
           | 
           | In terms of research, I used to keep all my photographs of
           | archival documents, PDFs of sources, etc in DEVONThink, but I
           | switched over to using the standard Photos app on Macs. It
           | has automatic OCR now so I'm able to search text that appears
           | in photographs quite easily. I did a lot of oral history
           | interviews to supplement the archival research. This book
           | wouldn't have been possible up until recently because it's
           | only in the past decade that so many historical archives have
           | been digitizing their collections. I was able to visit the
           | key archives in person, but with others, archivists were nice
           | enough to send me scans of key documents. Super grateful to
           | them.
        
         | dghlsakjg wrote:
         | From reading Michael Pollan, I recall that there was a lot of
         | work being done on psychedelics up here in Canada.
         | 
         | Did you look into that at all? Especially considering the
         | current stance on psychedelics in Canada (essentially
         | decriminalized), and the state of serious research, do you see
         | Canada being a pioneer going forward like it was in the past?
        
           | benbreen wrote:
           | Yes, Canada (and especially Saskatchewan) is very important
           | in psychedelic history. I didn't look into it much personally
           | because it's one part of the story that's been documented
           | very well already via the work of Ericka Dyck, which is
           | excellent. Specifically her book _Psychedelic Psychiatry: LSD
           | from Clinic to Campus_ (Johns Hopkins, 2008) but also other
           | articles by her students and collaborators.
        
         | 1letterunixname wrote:
         | Excellent find.
         | 
         | I heard perhaps urban folklore from an old-timer former
         | journalist that the LSD trade was monopolized by a single
         | criminal syndicate in the 50's. There are still some haunts
         | with local regulars not overrun with suits, squares, or
         | tourists.
        
           | codingdave wrote:
           | Why would a criminal syndicate in the 50s monopolize a drug
           | that was not illegal at that time?
        
             | 1letterunixname wrote:
             | Are you daft? Money. Doesn't matter if it's legal or not.
        
               | anigbrowl wrote:
               | Of course it matters. There isn't much money in selling
               | something where your criminal network doesn't give you
               | any advantage over other distributors.
        
               | bryanrasmussen wrote:
               | We have an idea, from our own vantage, that if it is not
               | illegal capitalism will inevitably try to monetize - but
               | what if that's not true. What if every company decides,
               | no we don't want to be associated with that business.
               | 
               | So then somebody who does want to be associated starts
               | doing it, but what if they want to be associated because
               | they've done the drug. Maybe they want to make the drug,
               | have access to the drug, sell the drug, but not do all
               | those other business bits like keep track of monetary
               | flow and pay taxes.
               | 
               | It's not illegal to sell the drug, but they are
               | essentially incapable of selling the drug legally.
               | 
               | Not saying that's the case - just saying it's not
               | impossible in the uptight 50s for it to have been the
               | case.
        
             | buildsjets wrote:
             | Not only was it not illegal, but at that time the patent
             | holder (Sandoz labs) was giving it away for free to
             | basically any researchers who wrote in asking for a sample,
             | in order to try and find a way they could monetize it.
        
         | bag_boy wrote:
         | Thanks for the recommendation.
         | 
         | After reading the article, I watched the Margaret Mead bit on
         | "The Rejected."
         | 
         | Hope your book does well. I'll buy it on Audible :)
        
         | buildsjets wrote:
         | Hi author! Given the timeframe of the subject, I was surprised
         | to see no mention in the New Yorker article of Al Hubbard, who
         | was well known to be involved in that early era, both in
         | developing now common therapeutic practices such as the use of
         | the Hubbard Room, and working to expose as many influential
         | cultural, religious, industrial, government, and military
         | figures to the experience as possible.
         | 
         | Was there any collaboration or correspondence between
         | Mead/Bateson and Hubbard? Documentation on Hubbard can be hard
         | to find, and he seems to have preferred it that way.
        
       | matrix87 wrote:
       | I used to do psychedelics frequently and tried really hard to get
       | something out of them. Up until the last time I dropped acid, I
       | just got high and came down.
       | 
       | The last time I ever did a psychedelic, I dropped acid and was
       | reading this book called "Be Here Now" by Ram Dass. There's a
       | part of the book that talks about drug induced psychosis. There's
       | some illustration of lightning hitting a tower. I remember
       | turning the page, seeing it, then hearing this super loud thunder
       | outside that shook the house
       | 
       | I stopped doing them after that point because it was some kind of
       | sign. When I started doing them I wasn't able to believe in God,
       | after that experience I could
        
         | dingnuts wrote:
         | >When I started doing them I wasn't able to believe in God,
         | after that experience I could
         | 
         | meanwhile, the experience of general anesthesia basically took
         | away my ability to believe in God
         | 
         | one in one out, I guess. It seems like I'd be happier if I'd
         | gone the other way but one can't control what one believes
        
           | matrix87 wrote:
           | I'm sorry. I didn't know that anesthesia could do that kind
           | of thing
        
       | profsummergig wrote:
       | I've never dropped acid.
       | 
       | Net-net, what's best in your (whosoever is reading this) opinion?
       | 
       | 1. To never drop acid.
       | 
       | 2. To try it out a couple times and never do it again?
       | 
       | 3. To add it as part of one's regimen as and when one needs it?
        
         | progmetaldev wrote:
         | I think it can be very worthwhile, but I would wait until
         | something internal calls you to use it. If you don't feel a
         | draw to it, I would suggest not ever trying it. If you decide
         | to use LSD, I would make sure to take it with others that have
         | experience using it, and that you deeply trust. It's very easy
         | to let go of your ego and spill every secret in your head, and
         | you'll want to make sure you're around people that won't be
         | judgmental of that. Personally, I think moderation is
         | definitely key, and this is coming from someone that did not
         | use moderation and ended up in a bad place because of abuse. I
         | was psychologically addicted, and I believe it helped
         | exacerbate latent anxiety. I was always somewhat anxious, but
         | it made my anxiety clinical and negatively life affecting. I
         | still think that it has its place, and can be extremely
         | profound and positively life changing. Make sure you are in a
         | good head space with people you trust, in surroundings that
         | won't drastically change for the length of your experience.
        
         | nyolfen wrote:
         | it is basically analogous to porn -- what porn serves for your
         | sex drive, acid and psychedelics generally do for your desire
         | for meaning and insight. occasionally you will hear of someone
         | who finds it therapeutic for trauma or something, but for most
         | people, even those who claim to have found great truths, it
         | makes no material impact on the course of their lives, unless
         | it is a negative one from emotional destabilization if they are
         | vulnerable for whatever reason. it can still be fun and worth
         | doing as a novelty but it is dangerously oversold imho.
        
         | tech_ken wrote:
         | 2 or 3, depending on definition of regimen, but also "best"
         | depends on what you're shooting for/concerned about. From what
         | evidence I've reviewed it seems pretty low-risk from a health
         | perspective, _as long as you 're taking prudent doses with
         | prudent infrequency_, and the effects are generally positive
         | although somewhat inconsistently so. If you're curious about
         | taking it, I would recommend doing so and picking between 2 and
         | 3 afterwards. If you have a lot of anxiety around drug use, or
         | are generally averse to intoxication, it might be better to
         | stick to 1 as I think you will find the experience
         | overwhelming. Regardless I would recommend not hyping up the
         | experience too much in your mind, as IMO the actual 'tripping'
         | experience on a standard 1 tab dose is quite different (and in
         | some ways more mild) than the typical media representation, and
         | I think too much fantasizing about what it's like can lead to
         | more anxiety than is really necessary. Finally, I would
         | recommend not taking more than 100ug in almost any
         | circumstances, as IMO beyond that point the downsides start to
         | accumulate far faster than the upsides.
         | 
         | Some background/trip-reporting-ish: For the last 6 months or so
         | I've been dosing around 25-50 micrograms at a frequency of ~1
         | per 2 weeks as my "going out" drug, rather than consuming
         | alcohol. Results have been mixed, definitely enjoyed some
         | nights very much but others the effects were similar to pot
         | paranoia. Lately I've decided that this is probably an
         | imprudent frequency and am dropping down to maybe once per
         | quarter, but will likely consume closer to 100ug per a session.
         | The things I like about it are:
         | 
         | * the rush of energy that persists for the first few hours
         | 
         | * the duration of the trip (4-6 hours of effects, which from a
         | bang/buck perspective is a plus in my book)
         | 
         | * the general silly vibe it creates in me.
         | 
         | Things I don't like about it are:
         | 
         | * the high body load (it creates a lot of muscle tension in my
         | body, and I often feel physically worn out the next day like I
         | was working out)
         | 
         | * the occasional paranoia/in-my-headness
         | 
         | * the higher level of emotional vulnerability I feel while at
         | peak trip (good for some social situations, but in the wrong
         | environment kind of sucks).
         | 
         | tl;dr: on the best trips I turn into a silly fae with a lot of
         | curiosity and humor, on the worst trips I turn into an
         | analytical gargoyle perched at the fringes of the function. In
         | all cases I'm kind of run down the next day.
        
         | 65 wrote:
         | Acid is one of those things that you do a few times then don't
         | have much of a desire to do again.
         | 
         | I've done acid about 15 times. Was fun, I guess.
         | 
         | Acid makes you think outside the box and really zoom out on
         | life. It feels like you're able to think 100x more in the time
         | you're tripping than sober. I would definitely try it. It can
         | open your mind a bit.
         | 
         | But I think magic mushrooms are overall better as an emotional
         | aid.
        
       | dmoy wrote:
       | Dang I thought this was gonna be about tripping on LSD-like
       | substances in rye bread in Salem before getting burned at the
       | stake for witchcraft in the 17th century.
        
       | UberFly wrote:
       | This thread has degenerated at warp speed into the kind of
       | generics that dang steered against in the first post. Not
       | surprised, but that was fast.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-01-22 23:00 UTC)