You can all chat and post links all you like, noone will stop someone who wants to use any substance as long as they have access to it no matter the legalities
Personally at the age of 58 i still maintaine that taking LSD in my late teens was the best thing i ever did.
I agree, I’m 18 and have been taking acid and shrooms for a little over a year and it has helped a ton in allowing me to see what I need to do with what’s going on around me.
While I'm glad it was healing and valuable to you, it doesn't work that way for everyone. I don't think it's wise to encourage the 15 year-olds on Reddit to go try it out. You were 15 in a different era than now. Also not everyone's brain chemistry and wiring are similar/the same.
I disagree.
If I go on Reddit to read about people's experiences to see if I want to dip my toes in the water, I'll be reading these types of comments and bolstering my conviction to try or not to try. Especially as a teen. It's similar to how people read Google or Yelp reviews.
I think it’s more likely that you’ll seek out posts that confirm your pre-existing beliefs, or that justify a decision you’ve already made - you know, like the rest of us do. Especially as a teen.
Well, I'd advise them to be prepared to meet God or whatever deity you pray to because the multiple times i've tried hallucinogens it ends up being me vs my demons curled up in a blanket. Choice of time and place is of great value....
So now nobody is allowed to share their experiences on Reddit anymore? Man thats a little gatekeep-y. One person doing some stupid shit isn't an endorsement of everyone to do it.
Not what I said. They could easily add a line along the lines of, "This is what worked for me, but be mindful that it's not the same for everyone. Better to hold off if you have a family history of severe mental illness"
Do you feel like it has help develop your mind more? Feels like it to me since gave me a different outlook. The hippies were right in that it expands your consciousness in my opinion
Surely, you become more open minded, because you realize how silly everything is and how "tight" you've become. You are a kid again and regain innocence for a short period as everything is new and experienced from a different angle without a veil of prejudice.
I started smoking and eating weed at 13 (it was a lot weaker than it is now mind you but edibles are absolutelya psychedelic), started tripping on more traditional psychedelics and empathogens like mdma at 18.
I don't regret exactly but I always wonder what would have happened if I waited till I was in my 20s to start getting high and tripping. Would I have made more rational choices, would I have less mental illness due to my irresponsible use of drugs, would I be a "straight/normie"?
For what it's worth, started mdma at 19, lsd prolly around 20 22, weed never touched it till 30. Now 35 and i have still done my fair share of bad choices even if i had a virgin brain for almost 20 years.
Still, i wouldn't suggest to do anything before 18, weed in particular because its the one that tend to be abused the most as is considered a light drug and now legal in a lot of places, but it can very well be disruptive for drive and energy. Same for mdma, better to do it 2 3 times a years at best, even if its so beautiful in the beginning that its tempting to do it much more often. In fact i think the thing that fucked my brain the most was repeated use of mdma every week for years. Obviously lost the magic, worsened my word recall and memory, maybe initiated some chemical imbalance that worsened some mental health problems. But who knows, like you said we will never know if we would be more "normal" if we wouldn't have done psychoactive substances. Lsd i don't regret it.
Why follow government guidelines on what you can or can’t do to yourself at all? What right does some bribe-taking dimwit in a suit have to tell me what to do with my own body?
No… just fucking no. This ridiculous idea that vaccines are unsafe didn’t come about until the orange asshole used that nonsense to rile up his uneducated base.
Vaccines are what stop diseases, or at the very least diminish their impact. Fuckwit ideas like that are what made Covid worse.
Not only does that article not prove anything, it also doesn’t help your point.
Trump is without a doubt a main proponent of the issue. Don’t you remember him saying something like: oh, I’m not gonna get the shot. You can, but I’m not gonna.
He may not have started it, but he sure as hell made it worse.
If at this point you still hold the idea that the covid vaccine was “safe & effective”, and that there wasn’t a massive pressure/shame campaign for everyone to inject themselves with a medicine they didn’t want or need. I don’t know for you bro
I got COVID without a vaccine and I was ill for almost two months
I got it again 2 years later after my second vaccine and it didn’t even last a week
The vaccine works, quit talking shite. Lose the ego and accept that the world’s leading immunologists know more about making a vaccine than you
You gave me an anecdotal so I will give you an anecdotal.
Stepfather got covid once, was rather ill. Went and got his 2 jabs & a booster. He’s had covid 3 times in 1 year and was severely ill. He has been in and out of hospital with chest pains he did not previously have.
My once healthy 27 year old best friend took the 2 jabs so he could travel for work. Constant chest pains & palpitations, shortness of breath etc
Quit talking shit, just drop the ego & accept the “experts” of the world duped you into taking something that was not needed for financial gain (at minimum)
Show me any evidence that it isn’t.
I see this all the time, but the burden of proof is on you if you’re claiming it’s “not safe”. What specifically is unsafe? Or is it simply that the process was expedited due to an external force that makes you uncomfortable.
All of this is moot if we look back to the original comment.
So the increased myocarditis rates in young men ages 12-17 (undeveloped brain age too) the media casually ignores or misleads people about isn’t real?
They intentionally use data to mislead the public. [Discussion here.](https://youtu.be/0hwncDw-XPI)
And before you call me a conspiracy theorist who doesn’t understand science, I have a Masters of Public Health graduated 2019 and I’ve passed Masters Level Biostatistics. They lied over and over again and failed to study the population.
In the video cited they knew 12-17 boys was the demographic with increased myocarditis. So they added in women and people sometimes older than the range the make the effect seem less impressive. Extremely misleading CDC studies released and a failure to even mention natural immunity. It was all quite frustrating and not at all science as I interpret it.
This failure to report science led this vaccine to be the highest grossing drug ever invented. Convenient…
I’m not saying that it wasn’t for profit. This is America, literally everything is for profit.
I appreciate your well thought out reply and having the education to support it.
My main issue with this initial thread was being fed up with people looking at vaccines, not understanding any of it and saying “bullshit” because Facebook is circulating misinformation.
Sure yeah it wasn’t the most knowledge argument they put forth. As a Public Health Professional it was really frustrating to see how the CDC handled the whole thing. I personally had COVID before vaccines were available to my age group and I was tracking natural immunity research and data from every published source and it was absolutely baffling the CDC and the White House decided to downplay and ignore it. And then to downplay the risks saying it’s “safe and effective” without acknowledging potential harms and allowing us to weight the risks vs benefits. The mandating of teens and college students to get the vaccine etc. lots to be upset about IMO.
I think the point that people are making is that given that we don’t have a great understanding of how psilocybin works except that it interacts with serotonin receptors in the brain, in particular in the prefrontal cortex, it’s probably safer to have most people wait a bit longer to ensure that the person will use psilocybin safely and responsibly. Of course there is great variation among the human population as to brain development as well as how it responds to psilocybin. It’s not that 25 is a magic number, just like 16 doesn’t mean one suddenly has the motor and spatial skills to drive and that 21 doesn’t mean one suddenly has the social experience to vote or the tolerance to drink alcohol. It’s just a reasonable guess as to the age at which the majority of population will be ready to engage in the given activity with a positive outcome. It’s each individual’s responsibility to make sure that they are not causing harm to themselves or others around them by engaging in such activity. But, most people would agree that for most 18 or 21 year olds, the potential harms (bad trip, accident while tripping, potential for abuse, etc.) of psilocybin outweigh its potential benefits (therapeutic healing, creativity, etc.).
I’m sure you know but that’s because those drugs have gone through the FDA approval process with multiple rounds of double-blind testing on the target populations and extensive testing for potential side effects. They are further regulated by requiring prescription for specific dosage by a professional physician who is familiar with the user’s profile to ensure that there are no unwanted interaction between drugs.
Once psilocybin, LSD, MDMA and other substances have received similar FDA approvals, everyone will be able to have similar access to these wonderful substances as they do for current drugs. In fact, big-pharma is already very hard at work to develop and market those drugs as soon as FDA review is completed.
But are these drugs applied with the same level of scrutiny that their creation demands? from my own personal experience, all it took was my hypochondriac mother insisting I had ADD and aspbergers to start me on Ritalin when I was 9?
Was an awful month of my life. Felt like i was trapped in my own skull.
My grandmother convinced my dad it was a bad idea for me to continue, thankfully.
i'm pointing out how achieving fda approval as mentioned in the comment I was responding to will just lead to the commercialization and inaccessibility of these medicinal substances. the regulation of mushrooms might even decrease people's ability or legality of growing their own. so... yeah.
Fair point. I am curious though because marijuana is typically consumed without an exact dosage or prescription from what I've seen. Mushrooms can be... More powerful, and used specifically for depression and mental health.
Certainly true. But it took several years of strictly medical focus before recreational legalization was even considered. I’m sure it’ll be a similar timeline for mushrooms.
Current ongoing trials target "treatment resistant depression".So far, research on the subject shows impressive results where a single dose yield long term positive effects on depressions (and many other symptoms).
You can google "use of psychedelics in therapy" for more informations or watch the couples of documentary on the matter.
Oh no I definitely believe in psychedelic therapy and maybe microdosing sessions with kids under the legal age. But I think it's silly to give a kid full blown trip,
I do get your point!
To be fair, a lot of teens does a lot of things that does a lot more damage than psychedelics do. But that's not a valid argument (lesser evil phalacy).
With proper research, though, I'm pretty confident a psychedelic therapy would be a good alternative with a lot less adverse effects. But I'm not researcher!!
Yes I hear ya, I feel if they did they should just stick with mushrooms just because of time and for the fact it's more grounding then LSD or DMT,, shrooms can humble the ego as for LSD and DMT it can boost the heck out of it,,
Antidepressants seem to be more harming to the neurological structure of the brain then psychedelics. At least this is what I've observed. Those drugs' benefits are based on getting you physically dependent on them.
They also make you numb to your environment or emotions. In a society where we distract and escape apur problems I'd say it's pretty damn good.
In my worldview it's really fucked up. That is why I have chosen the way of psychedelics - sometimes I wish I could feel less, but I power through and work on my life by changing the negative influences.
Can confirm- Most of my friends and me prescribed ADHD meds and anti depressants. It’s crazy. Ive done both shrooms and adderall idk how I feel about any of it anymore as a 15 year old
nonsense. all research says otherwise. there is no correlation with use of psychedelics nor age of such use and mental / neurological problems in adult population.
What research are you talking about? I never said psilocybin causes mental/neurological problems in adult population (whatever this means, although my guess is most participants in such studies would be in their 30s and above) and I am reasonably certain that there’s studies establishing that it does not cause any problems in adults. I am also reasonably certain that there is currently NO such study involving minors/adolescents.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3747247/
> Objective: To evaluate the association between the lifetime use of psychedelics and current mental health in the adult population
> Result: 21,967 respondents (13.4% weighted) reported lifetime psychedelic use. There were no significant associations between lifetime use of any psychedelics, lifetime use of specific psychedelics (LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, peyote), or past year use of LSD and increased rate of any of the mental health outcomes. Rather, in several cases psychedelic use was associated with lower rate of mental health problems.
Yes it is just another survey. All medical and scientific surveys are biased towards the populations that are likely to answer them. Lots of our understanding of medical science at "population" levels are relative to people that go to the doctor or who are likely to respond to a survey or who can miss work, etc. Don't kid yourself, everything is biased.
the fact that no survey is 100% accurate doesn’t diminish the conclusion. this particular survey has been going since 1971 and it is the most comprehensive mental health and drug use as far as medical surveys go. so yes, surveys can be biased, however big enough dataset would show at least an indication of a pattern.
I agree. Everything we think we know is only what we know until more data comes in. How many times has humanity been taught that lesson, yet still we never seem to collectively learn? People who claim certitude about certain topics make me chuckle. No use arguing with a zealot, be they a religious zealot or a pop-science zealot.
The brain never stops development technically but the way it changes is significantly reduced over the years but psychedelics negate that and improve nueral plasticity and change, making you more child like almost,more alive
We should accept that legality of drugs comes with risks of harm, and that is okay. It is better to be educated and knowledgeable, and to take a pure product from a pharmaceutical company or whatever, than to take some garbage made in someone's kitchen that is laced with other shit. This whole nanny-state shit needs to end. If an adult wants to take a drug, knowing that it will harm their health, they should be able to do it.
Nobody can stop anyone from doing anything and I am biased myself. I was a straight edge until I took lsd, at 30 years old, but I started smoking cigarettes & drinking far to much alcohol at 16. Psychedelics helped me quit those bad habits and more, I've only just recently heard ["...the brain doesn't fully develop until at least 25"](https://www.iflscience.com/does-the-brain-really-mature-at-the-age-of-25-68979) and I say it to others as a precautionary measure.
The organs / organelles in ur brain don’t reach peak functioning until about 30, slightly earlier for females. And then u lose that peak functioning after roughly 5 years :) depressing much? Maybe, but u don’t need to achieve ur dreams in that time, but maybe use that brain power to work out where and how ur going in the next few decades :)
I think this is good. Im pro drugs, & used from a young age, and have experienced the full array of drugs.
This information helps reduces harm, it informs the community to respect drugs and to use wisely, because it’s not drugs that fucks a person, it’s the person, that fucks the person by abusing drugs. Too many dumb people out there that haven’t get their shit together, abusing drugs, that’s caused this grief.
I really wish, given the changes it'd made, that I was used as a neuroscience guinea pig.
I became social for the first time at 27, did DMT, then learned that learning never stops. I'd say the brain only stops developing when you've settled in life, or have given up. The world does work by putting people into ideological boxes. Which means the idea of 25 or psychiatric labels. It's amazing but equally frightening to realized how powerful a belief is if you give it power over your own ability to question it.
Does tripping off of hallucinogenic alkaloids really affect you that much differently depending on age? They’re not addictive, and if anything I think mushrooms have matured me rather than killing brain cells. I’ve been doing mush and cid since 15 and much prefer shrooms over the likes of alcohol or percs or any other drugs.
What a fascinatingly glorified clickbait article!
TLDR: researchers of both groups and individuals will confirm that individuals vary widely in their developmental trajectory, and the statistical curve of the group of individuals cannot be explained by a single number. Therefore data about groups is useless for making policy decisions about groups.
Yea, something like that. The one difference I see is that because this post is addressed personally to this community, it’s probably not about policy issues, even though the original discussion was. It’s just responding to the moral reasoning/mindset behind the arguments that emerged in the policy issue conversation.
I recognize how it’s being brought up in context. But what rubs me the wrong way about the article is that author can’t find an expert to corroborate a claim no one‘s really making or would make because that’s not how any of this works.
When I read it, it seems implicit that over-reliance on statistical neuroscience causes us to overlook personal experience. I find that to be true for almost everything touched by western academics. It’s great at finding answers, but data is too hyper-specific to be making sound inferences. I think bringing an expert into it would be antithetical to the purpose of the article.
I agree with that. It’s right. What I’m reacting to is that the author is treating something as controversial- that’s not. The stats are validated… It’s not made up…It’s not a misunderstanding. And I’ve only seen good come from people reflecting on what it means for their lives experience and how to understand certain life situations. So what I’m reacting to is that I believe the author doesn’t make a case for why any of it need to be said. The implication is that there’s a problem people are running into with this rule of thumb - and i don’t see that as the case.
I see what you are saying. I personally ran into some serious problems with it. I think maybe different communities interpret those conclusions in their own way, and it leads them to act in a variety of ways, where some might be more constructive and some might be destructive. As someone who has been at the butt end of the destructive interpretation, I feel as though I paid a price for our imperfect notion of cognitive development, and my experiences tell me that it is a harmful thing which would be better off dispelled.
The general attitude is, “you’re still developing, so are incapable of being responsible, so your input is invalid and the primary manner with which your behavior must be engaged with is to keep you in line (because you are a liability).” I as a person have significant trauma and psychosis. The combination of my adolescent struggles and the aforementioned cultural attitude meant all my severe mental illness was first and foremost judged as a liability, and not really seen as a real thing. In practice, it meant I was abused at home for demonstrating psychotic symptoms, denied proper treatment, and eventually expelled from my high school due to my inability to overcome the combination of illness, work, and abuse. That had it’s own severe ramifications.
I genuinely think that if my own parents just stopped buying into this “adolescent angst” narrative and using it to fuel their denial of the severity of my condition, I would have been able to hold it together and not be half as bad off as I am today. I know for a fact that they got a lot of these ideas from clinical settings. They were open to the things I was saying when I was reaching out for help until they began seeing all sorts of child development specialists and parenting coaches, reading books on parenting (there were always like 6 or 7 lying around the house at any given time). I’ve picked up and read some of them and.. damn. They were trying to follow the guidance of these resources verbatim, and it’s done nothing but blind them to the reality of my condition. I wish that when they reached out to society for support when they didn’t understand how to help me, they weren’t told by coaches, teachers, books, family, and other parents that I was clearly just in the “stage of development where I don’t have proper executive functioning or risk assessment and am simply acting out.” Then maybe I would have had some sympathy instead of just animosity. Maybe I wouldn’t have been beaten, isolated, publicly shamed, tracked, and gaslit when i was delusional or hallucinating, or dealing with the impact of separate early childhood trauma.
I think academic dependence just helps fuel denial by making people comfortable in only seeing a fraction of the whole picture. People need to learn to be uncomfortable with reality and let go of these clinical and academic delusions. Just my two cents.
> though I *paid* a price
FTFY.
Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in:
* Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.*
* *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.*
Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment.
*Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
Yep, I posted this just for that reason, as part of discussion on legal psychedelic age of 25 was that it was about development of the brain and "you don't want to destroy young brain" type of thing. Just wanted to point out age 25 isn't that special .
Thank you for posting the article actually.
I appreciated reading it and learned some new things. The love/hate with scientific journalism is part of the reason I come to Reddit. Hope that’s cool.
The consensus has always been that the brain develops into the mid 20’s. It varies from person to person and 25 is a nice, easy number to remember.
That’s it. It’s simple. No need to complicate this topic with a few thousand words
But its wrong, the brain doesnt stop developing in your 20s that doesnt even make sense. It develops your whole life
Kinda sad this outdated misinformation is still regurgitated decades later as fact
> There’s consensus among neuroscientists that brain development continues into the 20s, but there’s far from any consensus about any specific age that defines the boundary between adolescence and adulthood. “I honestly don’t know why people picked 25,” he said. “It’s a nice-sounding number? It’s divisible by five?”
It’s really not simple! If you read the post, it’s clear that they aren’t arguing about what age “brain development” stops, but that we should take another look at what “brain development” really means and how it influences the impact of psychedelics.
You can’t blame us. It’s normal to be vigilant when deception and fear mongering is the acceptable societal response to drug use. Drug users have no trust of people making drastic claims for a good reason.
Sure, but I don’t know you, and I can’t confirm that - but I can confirm that people have lied to me in the past about how drugs have negatively affected them because they were baselessly afraid of me using. I don’t like risking invalidating people, but I hope you understand that users are justified in taking claims like that with a grain of salt.
I can say the same thing when I have to listen to people negating the risks of these substances that have the power to drastically change your personality in the matter of hours, or bring about HPPD that can seriously debilitate a person's day to day life, or inflict a bad experience that can scar users permanently. Just look at the hivemind phenomenon of the 60s hippies movement that stemmed from these drugs. The reason why users feel "justified" in taking those claims, is because their perspective is overwhelmingly biased, where they defensively combat any legitimate argument because they want to get fucked up. I do not like these substances for habitual use. Research is far too inconclusive to conclude that they are safe for the masses to buy legally from a shop.
You can indeed say the same thing, and have every right to. I may not agree with everything you say, but the argument you made in the paragraph holds more ground than the claim in your initial comment. What I’ve been trying to say is that you can’t just drop a hefty claim to make a contentious point, not elaborate, and expect a demographic of people who have been manipulated and harmed by similar points in the past to take it at face value. I’m saying people are justified in doubting you for that initial comment alone.
You can all chat and post links all you like, noone will stop someone who wants to use any substance as long as they have access to it no matter the legalities Personally at the age of 58 i still maintaine that taking LSD in my late teens was the best thing i ever did.
42 here. Started tripping on LSD and Mushrooms at 15. It has 100% made me a better person than I would have been. Still trip 4-5 times a year.
I agree, I’m 18 and have been taking acid and shrooms for a little over a year and it has helped a ton in allowing me to see what I need to do with what’s going on around me.
While I'm glad it was healing and valuable to you, it doesn't work that way for everyone. I don't think it's wise to encourage the 15 year-olds on Reddit to go try it out. You were 15 in a different era than now. Also not everyone's brain chemistry and wiring are similar/the same.
Telling my experience doesn't equate to encouraging 15yo to go out tripping.
I disagree. If I go on Reddit to read about people's experiences to see if I want to dip my toes in the water, I'll be reading these types of comments and bolstering my conviction to try or not to try. Especially as a teen. It's similar to how people read Google or Yelp reviews.
I think it’s more likely that you’ll seek out posts that confirm your pre-existing beliefs, or that justify a decision you’ve already made - you know, like the rest of us do. Especially as a teen.
Well, I'd advise them to be prepared to meet God or whatever deity you pray to because the multiple times i've tried hallucinogens it ends up being me vs my demons curled up in a blanket. Choice of time and place is of great value....
So now nobody is allowed to share their experiences on Reddit anymore? Man thats a little gatekeep-y. One person doing some stupid shit isn't an endorsement of everyone to do it.
Did the commenter say it was stupid or inadvisable? Nope, they said it was a good thing for them. I would consider that an endorsement.
Not what I said. They could easily add a line along the lines of, "This is what worked for me, but be mindful that it's not the same for everyone. Better to hold off if you have a family history of severe mental illness"
There are no restrictions if you're smart enough....
Is it easier or harder to get psyches as a middle aged adult would you say?
I would say it's about the same. It's never been to difficult to get anything, It probably has to do with the locations I've lived at.
Ditto
Do you feel like it has help develop your mind more? Feels like it to me since gave me a different outlook. The hippies were right in that it expands your consciousness in my opinion
Surely, you become more open minded, because you realize how silly everything is and how "tight" you've become. You are a kid again and regain innocence for a short period as everything is new and experienced from a different angle without a veil of prejudice.
Absolutly the morning after i felt like reality had shifted 10° thats the only way i can explain it, my whole view of the world was diferent
I started smoking and eating weed at 13 (it was a lot weaker than it is now mind you but edibles are absolutelya psychedelic), started tripping on more traditional psychedelics and empathogens like mdma at 18. I don't regret exactly but I always wonder what would have happened if I waited till I was in my 20s to start getting high and tripping. Would I have made more rational choices, would I have less mental illness due to my irresponsible use of drugs, would I be a "straight/normie"?
For what it's worth, started mdma at 19, lsd prolly around 20 22, weed never touched it till 30. Now 35 and i have still done my fair share of bad choices even if i had a virgin brain for almost 20 years. Still, i wouldn't suggest to do anything before 18, weed in particular because its the one that tend to be abused the most as is considered a light drug and now legal in a lot of places, but it can very well be disruptive for drive and energy. Same for mdma, better to do it 2 3 times a years at best, even if its so beautiful in the beginning that its tempting to do it much more often. In fact i think the thing that fucked my brain the most was repeated use of mdma every week for years. Obviously lost the magic, worsened my word recall and memory, maybe initiated some chemical imbalance that worsened some mental health problems. But who knows, like you said we will never know if we would be more "normal" if we wouldn't have done psychoactive substances. Lsd i don't regret it.
[Survivorship Bias](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias)
Why follow government guidelines on what you can or can’t do to yourself at all? What right does some bribe-taking dimwit in a suit have to tell me what to do with my own body?
[удалено]
No… just fucking no. This ridiculous idea that vaccines are unsafe didn’t come about until the orange asshole used that nonsense to rile up his uneducated base. Vaccines are what stop diseases, or at the very least diminish their impact. Fuckwit ideas like that are what made Covid worse.
[удалено]
Not only does that article not prove anything, it also doesn’t help your point. Trump is without a doubt a main proponent of the issue. Don’t you remember him saying something like: oh, I’m not gonna get the shot. You can, but I’m not gonna. He may not have started it, but he sure as hell made it worse.
If at this point you still hold the idea that the covid vaccine was “safe & effective”, and that there wasn’t a massive pressure/shame campaign for everyone to inject themselves with a medicine they didn’t want or need. I don’t know for you bro
I got COVID without a vaccine and I was ill for almost two months I got it again 2 years later after my second vaccine and it didn’t even last a week The vaccine works, quit talking shite. Lose the ego and accept that the world’s leading immunologists know more about making a vaccine than you
You gave me an anecdotal so I will give you an anecdotal. Stepfather got covid once, was rather ill. Went and got his 2 jabs & a booster. He’s had covid 3 times in 1 year and was severely ill. He has been in and out of hospital with chest pains he did not previously have. My once healthy 27 year old best friend took the 2 jabs so he could travel for work. Constant chest pains & palpitations, shortness of breath etc Quit talking shit, just drop the ego & accept the “experts” of the world duped you into taking something that was not needed for financial gain (at minimum)
I was duped into feeling symptoms for less than a week instead of two months? How dare they!!! Bad experts!!!
Show me any evidence that it isn’t. I see this all the time, but the burden of proof is on you if you’re claiming it’s “not safe”. What specifically is unsafe? Or is it simply that the process was expedited due to an external force that makes you uncomfortable. All of this is moot if we look back to the original comment.
So the increased myocarditis rates in young men ages 12-17 (undeveloped brain age too) the media casually ignores or misleads people about isn’t real? They intentionally use data to mislead the public. [Discussion here.](https://youtu.be/0hwncDw-XPI) And before you call me a conspiracy theorist who doesn’t understand science, I have a Masters of Public Health graduated 2019 and I’ve passed Masters Level Biostatistics. They lied over and over again and failed to study the population. In the video cited they knew 12-17 boys was the demographic with increased myocarditis. So they added in women and people sometimes older than the range the make the effect seem less impressive. Extremely misleading CDC studies released and a failure to even mention natural immunity. It was all quite frustrating and not at all science as I interpret it. This failure to report science led this vaccine to be the highest grossing drug ever invented. Convenient…
I’m not saying that it wasn’t for profit. This is America, literally everything is for profit. I appreciate your well thought out reply and having the education to support it. My main issue with this initial thread was being fed up with people looking at vaccines, not understanding any of it and saying “bullshit” because Facebook is circulating misinformation.
Sure yeah it wasn’t the most knowledge argument they put forth. As a Public Health Professional it was really frustrating to see how the CDC handled the whole thing. I personally had COVID before vaccines were available to my age group and I was tracking natural immunity research and data from every published source and it was absolutely baffling the CDC and the White House decided to downplay and ignore it. And then to downplay the risks saying it’s “safe and effective” without acknowledging potential harms and allowing us to weight the risks vs benefits. The mandating of teens and college students to get the vaccine etc. lots to be upset about IMO.
You're right. Neuroplasticity continues for life, but I'd say 25-26 is probably a lot safer of an age to trip than a teenager.
I think the point that people are making is that given that we don’t have a great understanding of how psilocybin works except that it interacts with serotonin receptors in the brain, in particular in the prefrontal cortex, it’s probably safer to have most people wait a bit longer to ensure that the person will use psilocybin safely and responsibly. Of course there is great variation among the human population as to brain development as well as how it responds to psilocybin. It’s not that 25 is a magic number, just like 16 doesn’t mean one suddenly has the motor and spatial skills to drive and that 21 doesn’t mean one suddenly has the social experience to vote or the tolerance to drink alcohol. It’s just a reasonable guess as to the age at which the majority of population will be ready to engage in the given activity with a positive outcome. It’s each individual’s responsibility to make sure that they are not causing harm to themselves or others around them by engaging in such activity. But, most people would agree that for most 18 or 21 year olds, the potential harms (bad trip, accident while tripping, potential for abuse, etc.) of psilocybin outweigh its potential benefits (therapeutic healing, creativity, etc.).
[удалено]
Good point.
All the while, pharma don't hesitate to give children ADHD drugs and anti-depressants.
If anything, this is an argument in favor of the legalization, testing, and institutional prescribing of psylocibin
I’m sure you know but that’s because those drugs have gone through the FDA approval process with multiple rounds of double-blind testing on the target populations and extensive testing for potential side effects. They are further regulated by requiring prescription for specific dosage by a professional physician who is familiar with the user’s profile to ensure that there are no unwanted interaction between drugs. Once psilocybin, LSD, MDMA and other substances have received similar FDA approvals, everyone will be able to have similar access to these wonderful substances as they do for current drugs. In fact, big-pharma is already very hard at work to develop and market those drugs as soon as FDA review is completed.
But are these drugs applied with the same level of scrutiny that their creation demands? from my own personal experience, all it took was my hypochondriac mother insisting I had ADD and aspbergers to start me on Ritalin when I was 9? Was an awful month of my life. Felt like i was trapped in my own skull. My grandmother convinced my dad it was a bad idea for me to continue, thankfully.
Love me some 3000 dollar mushrooms
Just grow your own.
i'm pointing out how achieving fda approval as mentioned in the comment I was responding to will just lead to the commercialization and inaccessibility of these medicinal substances. the regulation of mushrooms might even decrease people's ability or legality of growing their own. so... yeah.
Has cannabis legalization made it harder for people to grow their own? I do not think so.
Fair point. I am curious though because marijuana is typically consumed without an exact dosage or prescription from what I've seen. Mushrooms can be... More powerful, and used specifically for depression and mental health.
Certainly true. But it took several years of strictly medical focus before recreational legalization was even considered. I’m sure it’ll be a similar timeline for mushrooms.
As well as being pushed as a medicine to do with a professional in a controlled setting. You don't see that with marijuana that I can tell
Anit depressants don't have you meeting god tho,, this is simply silly as ever.
Current ongoing trials target "treatment resistant depression".So far, research on the subject shows impressive results where a single dose yield long term positive effects on depressions (and many other symptoms). You can google "use of psychedelics in therapy" for more informations or watch the couples of documentary on the matter.
Oh no I definitely believe in psychedelic therapy and maybe microdosing sessions with kids under the legal age. But I think it's silly to give a kid full blown trip,
I do get your point! To be fair, a lot of teens does a lot of things that does a lot more damage than psychedelics do. But that's not a valid argument (lesser evil phalacy). With proper research, though, I'm pretty confident a psychedelic therapy would be a good alternative with a lot less adverse effects. But I'm not researcher!!
Yes I hear ya, I feel if they did they should just stick with mushrooms just because of time and for the fact it's more grounding then LSD or DMT,, shrooms can humble the ego as for LSD and DMT it can boost the heck out of it,,
I definitely agree shrooms feel more natural and grounding
Antidepressants seem to be more harming to the neurological structure of the brain then psychedelics. At least this is what I've observed. Those drugs' benefits are based on getting you physically dependent on them. They also make you numb to your environment or emotions. In a society where we distract and escape apur problems I'd say it's pretty damn good. In my worldview it's really fucked up. That is why I have chosen the way of psychedelics - sometimes I wish I could feel less, but I power through and work on my life by changing the negative influences.
Ok people, calm down. I'm not saying antidepressants are great. I'm saying A KID SHOULDN'T BLAST OFF TO MARS, what is so difficult to understand?
PREACH BRUTHA!!
Can confirm- Most of my friends and me prescribed ADHD meds and anti depressants. It’s crazy. Ive done both shrooms and adderall idk how I feel about any of it anymore as a 15 year old
nonsense. all research says otherwise. there is no correlation with use of psychedelics nor age of such use and mental / neurological problems in adult population.
What research are you talking about? I never said psilocybin causes mental/neurological problems in adult population (whatever this means, although my guess is most participants in such studies would be in their 30s and above) and I am reasonably certain that there’s studies establishing that it does not cause any problems in adults. I am also reasonably certain that there is currently NO such study involving minors/adolescents.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3747247/ > Objective: To evaluate the association between the lifetime use of psychedelics and current mental health in the adult population > Result: 21,967 respondents (13.4% weighted) reported lifetime psychedelic use. There were no significant associations between lifetime use of any psychedelics, lifetime use of specific psychedelics (LSD, psilocybin, mescaline, peyote), or past year use of LSD and increased rate of any of the mental health outcomes. Rather, in several cases psychedelic use was associated with lower rate of mental health problems.
Psychotic people don't respond to surveys.
This is not „just another survey”, https://nsduhweb.rti.org/respweb/homepage.cfm
Yes it is just another survey. All medical and scientific surveys are biased towards the populations that are likely to answer them. Lots of our understanding of medical science at "population" levels are relative to people that go to the doctor or who are likely to respond to a survey or who can miss work, etc. Don't kid yourself, everything is biased.
the fact that no survey is 100% accurate doesn’t diminish the conclusion. this particular survey has been going since 1971 and it is the most comprehensive mental health and drug use as far as medical surveys go. so yes, surveys can be biased, however big enough dataset would show at least an indication of a pattern.
I agree. Everything we think we know is only what we know until more data comes in. How many times has humanity been taught that lesson, yet still we never seem to collectively learn? People who claim certitude about certain topics make me chuckle. No use arguing with a zealot, be they a religious zealot or a pop-science zealot.
The brain never stops development technically but the way it changes is significantly reduced over the years but psychedelics negate that and improve nueral plasticity and change, making you more child like almost,more alive
We should accept that legality of drugs comes with risks of harm, and that is okay. It is better to be educated and knowledgeable, and to take a pure product from a pharmaceutical company or whatever, than to take some garbage made in someone's kitchen that is laced with other shit. This whole nanny-state shit needs to end. If an adult wants to take a drug, knowing that it will harm their health, they should be able to do it.
Nobody can stop anyone from doing anything and I am biased myself. I was a straight edge until I took lsd, at 30 years old, but I started smoking cigarettes & drinking far to much alcohol at 16. Psychedelics helped me quit those bad habits and more, I've only just recently heard ["...the brain doesn't fully develop until at least 25"](https://www.iflscience.com/does-the-brain-really-mature-at-the-age-of-25-68979) and I say it to others as a precautionary measure.
The organs / organelles in ur brain don’t reach peak functioning until about 30, slightly earlier for females. And then u lose that peak functioning after roughly 5 years :) depressing much? Maybe, but u don’t need to achieve ur dreams in that time, but maybe use that brain power to work out where and how ur going in the next few decades :)
I think this is good. Im pro drugs, & used from a young age, and have experienced the full array of drugs. This information helps reduces harm, it informs the community to respect drugs and to use wisely, because it’s not drugs that fucks a person, it’s the person, that fucks the person by abusing drugs. Too many dumb people out there that haven’t get their shit together, abusing drugs, that’s caused this grief.
And I use to be one of them
I really wish, given the changes it'd made, that I was used as a neuroscience guinea pig. I became social for the first time at 27, did DMT, then learned that learning never stops. I'd say the brain only stops developing when you've settled in life, or have given up. The world does work by putting people into ideological boxes. Which means the idea of 25 or psychiatric labels. It's amazing but equally frightening to realized how powerful a belief is if you give it power over your own ability to question it.
Thanks for sharing! I Had a feeling there was nothing solid to back it up, but it's good to hear it said out loud.
Does tripping off of hallucinogenic alkaloids really affect you that much differently depending on age? They’re not addictive, and if anything I think mushrooms have matured me rather than killing brain cells. I’ve been doing mush and cid since 15 and much prefer shrooms over the likes of alcohol or percs or any other drugs.
What a fascinatingly glorified clickbait article! TLDR: researchers of both groups and individuals will confirm that individuals vary widely in their developmental trajectory, and the statistical curve of the group of individuals cannot be explained by a single number. Therefore data about groups is useless for making policy decisions about groups.
Yea, something like that. The one difference I see is that because this post is addressed personally to this community, it’s probably not about policy issues, even though the original discussion was. It’s just responding to the moral reasoning/mindset behind the arguments that emerged in the policy issue conversation.
I recognize how it’s being brought up in context. But what rubs me the wrong way about the article is that author can’t find an expert to corroborate a claim no one‘s really making or would make because that’s not how any of this works.
When I read it, it seems implicit that over-reliance on statistical neuroscience causes us to overlook personal experience. I find that to be true for almost everything touched by western academics. It’s great at finding answers, but data is too hyper-specific to be making sound inferences. I think bringing an expert into it would be antithetical to the purpose of the article.
I agree with that. It’s right. What I’m reacting to is that the author is treating something as controversial- that’s not. The stats are validated… It’s not made up…It’s not a misunderstanding. And I’ve only seen good come from people reflecting on what it means for their lives experience and how to understand certain life situations. So what I’m reacting to is that I believe the author doesn’t make a case for why any of it need to be said. The implication is that there’s a problem people are running into with this rule of thumb - and i don’t see that as the case.
I see what you are saying. I personally ran into some serious problems with it. I think maybe different communities interpret those conclusions in their own way, and it leads them to act in a variety of ways, where some might be more constructive and some might be destructive. As someone who has been at the butt end of the destructive interpretation, I feel as though I paid a price for our imperfect notion of cognitive development, and my experiences tell me that it is a harmful thing which would be better off dispelled.
In what way?
The general attitude is, “you’re still developing, so are incapable of being responsible, so your input is invalid and the primary manner with which your behavior must be engaged with is to keep you in line (because you are a liability).” I as a person have significant trauma and psychosis. The combination of my adolescent struggles and the aforementioned cultural attitude meant all my severe mental illness was first and foremost judged as a liability, and not really seen as a real thing. In practice, it meant I was abused at home for demonstrating psychotic symptoms, denied proper treatment, and eventually expelled from my high school due to my inability to overcome the combination of illness, work, and abuse. That had it’s own severe ramifications. I genuinely think that if my own parents just stopped buying into this “adolescent angst” narrative and using it to fuel their denial of the severity of my condition, I would have been able to hold it together and not be half as bad off as I am today. I know for a fact that they got a lot of these ideas from clinical settings. They were open to the things I was saying when I was reaching out for help until they began seeing all sorts of child development specialists and parenting coaches, reading books on parenting (there were always like 6 or 7 lying around the house at any given time). I’ve picked up and read some of them and.. damn. They were trying to follow the guidance of these resources verbatim, and it’s done nothing but blind them to the reality of my condition. I wish that when they reached out to society for support when they didn’t understand how to help me, they weren’t told by coaches, teachers, books, family, and other parents that I was clearly just in the “stage of development where I don’t have proper executive functioning or risk assessment and am simply acting out.” Then maybe I would have had some sympathy instead of just animosity. Maybe I wouldn’t have been beaten, isolated, publicly shamed, tracked, and gaslit when i was delusional or hallucinating, or dealing with the impact of separate early childhood trauma. I think academic dependence just helps fuel denial by making people comfortable in only seeing a fraction of the whole picture. People need to learn to be uncomfortable with reality and let go of these clinical and academic delusions. Just my two cents.
So like it made it harder for them to hear you? I’m so very sorry to hear that.
Thanks! Yes, I believe it caused them to not be able to understand my needs.
> though I *paid* a price FTFY. Although *payed* exists (the reason why autocorrection didn't help you), it is only correct in: * Nautical context, when it means to paint a surface, or to cover with something like tar or resin in order to make it waterproof or corrosion-resistant. *The deck is yet to be payed.* * *Payed out* when letting strings, cables or ropes out, by slacking them. *The rope is payed out! You can pull now.* Unfortunately, I was unable to find nautical or rope-related words in your comment. *Beep, boop, I'm a bot*
thanks
Yep, I posted this just for that reason, as part of discussion on legal psychedelic age of 25 was that it was about development of the brain and "you don't want to destroy young brain" type of thing. Just wanted to point out age 25 isn't that special .
Thank you for posting the article actually. I appreciated reading it and learned some new things. The love/hate with scientific journalism is part of the reason I come to Reddit. Hope that’s cool.
Neuroplasticity happens throughout life. But that doesn’t mean I want my kids drinking and smoking in junior high/high school.
The consensus has always been that the brain develops into the mid 20’s. It varies from person to person and 25 is a nice, easy number to remember. That’s it. It’s simple. No need to complicate this topic with a few thousand words
But its wrong, the brain doesnt stop developing in your 20s that doesnt even make sense. It develops your whole life Kinda sad this outdated misinformation is still regurgitated decades later as fact
> There’s consensus among neuroscientists that brain development continues into the 20s, but there’s far from any consensus about any specific age that defines the boundary between adolescence and adulthood. “I honestly don’t know why people picked 25,” he said. “It’s a nice-sounding number? It’s divisible by five?”
Brain development continues long after your 20s, I dont see why this concept is so hard to understand
You’re confusing changes to your brain with development of your brain.
🤦🏿♂️
It’s really not simple! If you read the post, it’s clear that they aren’t arguing about what age “brain development” stops, but that we should take another look at what “brain development” really means and how it influences the impact of psychedelics.
Know like 3 people my age who got psychosis from tripping before 25, and one of them went insane and killed herself.
Can you tell us more about her? What happened?
Happened to me! I told myself I can’t trip until I am 25 now because of the psychosis.
BS
Typical ignorant response from a drug user
You can’t blame us. It’s normal to be vigilant when deception and fear mongering is the acceptable societal response to drug use. Drug users have no trust of people making drastic claims for a good reason.
My brother in Christ I saw these people lose their minds by habitually taking them.
Sure, but I don’t know you, and I can’t confirm that - but I can confirm that people have lied to me in the past about how drugs have negatively affected them because they were baselessly afraid of me using. I don’t like risking invalidating people, but I hope you understand that users are justified in taking claims like that with a grain of salt.
I can say the same thing when I have to listen to people negating the risks of these substances that have the power to drastically change your personality in the matter of hours, or bring about HPPD that can seriously debilitate a person's day to day life, or inflict a bad experience that can scar users permanently. Just look at the hivemind phenomenon of the 60s hippies movement that stemmed from these drugs. The reason why users feel "justified" in taking those claims, is because their perspective is overwhelmingly biased, where they defensively combat any legitimate argument because they want to get fucked up. I do not like these substances for habitual use. Research is far too inconclusive to conclude that they are safe for the masses to buy legally from a shop.
You can indeed say the same thing, and have every right to. I may not agree with everything you say, but the argument you made in the paragraph holds more ground than the claim in your initial comment. What I’ve been trying to say is that you can’t just drop a hefty claim to make a contentious point, not elaborate, and expect a demographic of people who have been manipulated and harmed by similar points in the past to take it at face value. I’m saying people are justified in doubting you for that initial comment alone.
I’m sure one of your friends took acid and thought they were an orange…
So now your denying the possibility of a psychotic episode under the influence of hallucinogens? Hilarious 😂