LSD or heroin? [Archive] - Two Plus Two Older Archives

10-22-2005, 09:19 PM

My friends and I were talking about drugs the other day and I was wondering what the OOT's take is on this senario.

The situation is as follows: You have a choice between doing one hit of LSD of one dose of heroin (shooting up with a needle, not smoking). Based only on long term consequences which do you choose?

Heroin has seemingly no long term effects from a single dose, however LSD stays in you spinal fluid and brain forever. I picked heroin because the only downside is possible addiction (plus I've heard its supposed to kick ass). My friends told me that shooting up one time with heroin will get you hopelessly addicted. I shrugged this off as scare stories from the anti drug crowd.

What do you guys think? LSD or Heroin. Also is Heroin really that addictive?

newhizzle

10-22-2005, 09:24 PM

LSD is fun

tonypaladino

10-22-2005, 09:24 PM

I don't know if one hit will get you hooked, but herion is the most addictive recreational drug.

i pick acid, and it's not even close (i'd been wanting to try it anyway, but even if i wasn't, i'd pick it)

10-22-2005, 09:31 PM

Acid really isnt that big of a deal. Just one typical tab wouldnt even be as good or fun as taking an 8th of shrooms.

Make it crystal meth vs. heroin and then you've got yourself a decision to make.

Blarg

10-22-2005, 09:32 PM

I've read a few heroin addicts, William Burroughs among them, who say giving up nicotine is way harder than giving up heroin.

Where do you get the idea or info that LSD stays in your brain and spinal column forever? I've never heard that one, and it doesn't sound likely.

Hermlord

10-22-2005, 09:39 PM

LSD does not stay in your body forever; this is flat-out false. Nor does it damage your chromosones. There is no measurable long-term physical consequence from one hit of LSD.

It could have long-term psychological effects, but so could any intense life experience. Sometimes it can trigger pre-existing but latent issues.

Mainlining any drug is more dangerous, since any impurities are also taken more directly. But since this is a hypothetical, we can assume both drugs are known pure.

Heroin is more addictive physically and mentally, but hardly to the point that one dose hooks you for life. In fact cigarettes are far more addictive statistically.

So, I'd probably say heroin because that's the one I haven't tried yet :-)

Like every other drug question, your research should start with http://www.erowid.org .

To repeat, the LSD-in-the-spine thing is pure myth. Not that I necessarily endorse it, but we should get the facts right before forming opinions.

ghostface

10-22-2005, 09:42 PM

[ QUOTE ]

To repeat, the LSD-in-the-spine thing is pure myth. Not that I necessarily endorse it, but we should get the facts right before forming opinions.

[/ QUOTE ]

So the stories about acid flashbacks are not true either?

newhizzle

10-22-2005, 09:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

To repeat, the LSD-in-the-spine thing is pure myth. Not that I necessarily endorse it, but we should get the facts right before forming opinions.

[/ QUOTE ]

So the stories about acid flashbacks are not true either?

[/ QUOTE ]

acid flashbacks are true, the spine thing is not

Blarg

10-22-2005, 09:44 PM

The one does not imply the other.

Hermlord

10-22-2005, 09:46 PM

Hamish McBagpipe

10-22-2005, 09:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
So the stories about acid flashbacks are not true either?

[/ QUOTE ]

I used to do quite a lot of acid. Acid flashbacks are real but minor unless maybe you do it like every day. Flashbacks are not that big a deal. After the first few times I took acid I realized that doing it is sometimes a 3 day affair so it's not realistic to do it that often. Not addictive at all though. Someone who said that acid was a minor drug or experience didn't get the right [censored].

raisins

10-22-2005, 09:54 PM

Neither one is a big deal. You will not get hopelessly addicted from shooting up one time. It's possible to develop a habit from a weekend of f_cking around with it, but this scenario is assuming you are shooting it multiple times. Even then if you're willing to feel sick and deal with not being able to have it you'll come through alright. In my opinion the real problem people have with kicking addictions, regardless of whether the body is physiologically addicted or not, is the psychological element. By that I mean they have sold out to a feeling. If you can appreciate that you can feel good and that at some point the feeling is going to end and not come back then you are not likely to end up with a habit. Many people can not look at their own feelings with detachment.

LSD does present the small danger of you not being able to handle your feelings and doing something impulsive while delusional/disoriented that has tragic consequences. This is why set and setting are important in any drug use, in particular the psychedelics. But if you are in a safe place with people you believe to have good intentions towards you there is no great danger here either. You are somewhat psychologically open when you are on it. If negative thoughts and feelings come upon you then the ability to detach and just let them be there and then pass is enough to get you through it.

regards,

raisins

Blarg

10-22-2005, 10:04 PM

Good post.

Set and setting is definitely extremely important. It is dangerous to be around people you don't trust, and you shouldn't take it if feeling stressed or fearful. You have to be honest with yourself about this; if you are feeling fearful or psychologically not your best, the time to make up a cover story to yourself about it is not right before you take LSD.

I do think it's important to note that, in the same way booze affects your judgment and so renders you less capable of correctly judging when you are driving well, LSD can render you much less able to deal with negative feelings or fantasies. Just sitting through it may not be very easy at all. It's good to do it with responsible people around that you really feel good about, so if anything goes wrong, people can talk you down and help you wait out anything bad.

LSD doesn't have to be bad at all, and you can even direct your hallucinations willfully sometimes, but I'd just advise some caution and honesty with yourself. It's not the drug to take to fart around with your [censored] friends, or when you have to go to work tomorrow, or if you've got some bad feelings nagging at you.

Malachii

10-22-2005, 10:20 PM

LSD. It isn't close.
[ QUOTE ]
Also is Heroin really that addictive?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes

shaniac

10-22-2005, 10:30 PM

If you're a reluctant drug user and someone has put a gun to your head, which drug is less harmful, long term and short? Is that the question?

Assuming you don't have a super-addictive personality and that the drug is injected safely, you should take the shot of Heroin, since it will probably just make you feel nauseous and sleepy and the sensation will fade relatively relatively quickly. Unless you have a romantic view of the drug, or an ambition to become an addict, the experience will be un-memorable and probably at least vaguely unpleasant (I've never used it intravenously, only sniffed it, but that's my experience).

LSD, on the other hand, promises to be a long drawn-out adventure, where set and setting become even more important to ensuring a healthy experience. And there's always a tiny chance that you'll spend the rest of your life believing that you are a glass of orange juice.

send_the_msg

10-22-2005, 10:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
LSD does not stay in your body forever; this is flat-out false. Nor does it damage your chromosones. There is no measurable long-term physical consequence from one hit of LSD.

It could have long-term psychological effects, but so could any intense life experience. Sometimes it can trigger pre-existing but latent issues.

Mainlining any drug is more dangerous, since any impurities are also taken more directly. But since this is a hypothetical, we can assume both drugs are known pure.

Heroin is more addictive physically and mentally, but hardly to the point that one dose hooks you for life. In fact cigarettes are far more addictive statistically.

So, I'd probably say heroin because that's the one I haven't tried yet :-)

Like every other drug question, your research should start with http://www.erowid.org .

To repeat, the LSD-in-the-spine thing is pure myth. Not that I necessarily endorse it, but we should get the facts right before forming opinions.

[/ QUOTE ]

i've heard of people breaking their necks later in life and tripping balls, this is not true? also doesn't the army do spinal taps for this reason?

Blarg

10-22-2005, 11:03 PM

Breaking their necks? Whaaa?

send_the_msg

10-22-2005, 11:05 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Breaking their necks? Whaaa?

[/ QUOTE ]

woops, i meant spine... or something like that

10-22-2005, 11:05 PM

I think heroin is MORE addictive than LSD. LSD is more like ecstasy than heroin and since I tried ecstasy before and don't feel addicted to it, I think I'll go with LSD. I don't know many people who tried heroin, but I assume that it's a lot worse than LSD judging from what I heard/read/seen in the media or through friends.

Aytumious

10-22-2005, 11:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Breaking their necks? Whaaa?

[/ QUOTE ]

woops, i meant spine... or something like that

[/ QUOTE ]

You sound very informed.

send_the_msg

10-22-2005, 11:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Breaking their necks? Whaaa?

[/ QUOTE ]

woops, i meant spine... or something like that

[/ QUOTE ]

You sound very informed.

[/ QUOTE ]

hah yeah i was just thinking that myself. a slight breeze could push me off this thought

10-22-2005, 11:13 PM

This thread absolutely reeks of DARE induced stupidity. Apparently a lot of you have absolutely no idea what the drugs in question do and how they affect you.

Give me the LSD any day. Hurrr LSD stays in your spine and then your SPINE BREAKS AND YOU DIE!!! No.

SheetWise

10-22-2005, 11:14 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Based only on long term consequences which do you choose?

[/ QUOTE ]
Heroin. If you shoot clean heroin your entire life, you'll die of old age (or boredom). As far as consequences, I don't think it's even close. If the question was, which would you rather ... well, that's a whole different question.

Malachii

10-22-2005, 11:31 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think heroin is MORE addictive than LSD.

[/ QUOTE ]
LSD isn't addictive.

10-22-2005, 11:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think heroin is MORE addictive than LSD.

[/ QUOTE ]
LSD isn't addictive.

[/ QUOTE ]

explain please.

nothumb

10-22-2005, 11:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Based only on long term consequences which do you choose?

[/ QUOTE ]
Heroin. If you shoot clean heroin your entire life, you'll die of old age (or boredom). As far as consequences, I don't think it's even close. If the question was, which would you rather ... well, that's a whole different question.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the correct response.

Otherwise, I suppose I have to select acid since it's the one I've tried. But I don't think I'd have a big problem doing either and letting it go.

NT

10-22-2005, 11:51 PM

[ QUOTE ]

explain please.

[/ QUOTE ]

It causes no physical dependence or withdrawal symptoms.

bozlax

10-22-2005, 11:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
...LSD stays in you spinal fluid and brain forever.
...
I shrugged this off as scare stories from the anti drug crowd.

[/ QUOTE ]

LSD is actually stored in fat. That's why former users will frequently get some serious flashbacks if they start trying to lose weight later in life. Further, back in the late 80's when designer drugs were first hitting the scene, and Ecstacy was first up, it was Ecstacy that was supposed to somehow harm your spinal fluid. And yet, miraculously, the first generation of ravers are still walking around, and posting meaningless, inarticulate messages in OOT.

tonypaladino

10-23-2005, 12:05 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think heroin is MORE addictive than LSD.

[/ QUOTE ]
LSD isn't addictive.

[/ QUOTE ]

explain please.

[/ QUOTE ]

Certain organizations feel Americans are too stupid to use various recreational drugs responsible and have hammered a message of "all drugs are bad, hmmkay" into you're head, and you, having no independant thought process, beleive it.

Good enough explaination?

jnalpak

10-23-2005, 12:50 AM

[ QUOTE ]
wouldnt even be as good or fun as taking an 8th and a half of shrooms.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

astroglide

10-23-2005, 12:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
LSD is actually stored in fat. That's why former users will frequently get some serious flashbacks if they start trying to lose weight later in life.

[/ QUOTE ]

i hear eating salmon makes you pregnant, too

BigBaitsim (milo)

10-23-2005, 12:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

explain please.

[/ QUOTE ]

It causes no physical dependence or withdrawal symptoms.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is correct. Nonetheless, it's a bad idea.

peachy

10-23-2005, 07:34 AM

u are more likely to get addicted to heroin then LSD so u gotta take that into consideration, plus its not as DIRTY if u dont shoot it up and just as good

but it all depends on ur body on if u get addicted and how your neruontransmitters, etc deal with the drugs in ur system...so some might need it more than others.

Heroine would be my choice over LSD, i never liked how any type of LSD felt

gabbahh

10-23-2005, 07:46 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Acid really isnt that big of a deal. Just one typical tab wouldnt even be as good or fun as taking an 8th of shrooms.

[/ QUOTE ]
PM me your address, I'll prove you wrong. You obviously never had any good LSD.

AngryCola

10-23-2005, 09:03 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LSD is actually stored in fat. That's why former users will frequently get some serious flashbacks if they start trying to lose weight later in life.

[/ QUOTE ]

i hear eating salmon makes you pregnant, too

[/ QUOTE ]

Beautiful.

There is so much bad information in this thread. Most of it has been corrected by relatively knowledgeable people, though.

AngryCola

10-23-2005, 09:12 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Based only on long term consequences which do you choose?

[/ QUOTE ]
Heroin. If you shoot clean heroin your entire life, you'll die of old age (or boredom). As far as consequences, I don't think it's even close.

[/ QUOTE ]

Define consequences.

I say that because it's not specified how often the subject shoots herion or uses acid. Frequency of use will create all sorts of different types of consequences. For instance, if your're using heroin your whole life, you're going to 'need' it more often than is reasonable.

In short, your opinion needs more explanation.

Roy Munson

10-23-2005, 09:31 AM

Why would you want to limit yourself to just one choice when there is nothing stopping you from trying each one.

Heroin and LSD are very unique and distinctive experiences that I would recommend to anyone who is curious.

The addictive nature of heroin is overblown. I have dabbled in it 2-4 times per year for over 20 years and have yet to become addicted.

phil_ivey_fan

10-23-2005, 10:01 AM

[ QUOTE ]

Heroin is more addictive physically and mentally, but hardly to the point that one dose hooks you for life. In fact cigarettes are far more addictive statistically.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. this is an extremely ignorant statement. statistically? please. how many ppl use heroin. now divide that by the number of ppl who smoke cigarettes...

2. your statement is still wrong. one hit of heroin is way more addictive than one cigarette. two hits of heroin is way more addictive than 2 cigarettes. and so on and so forth...

phil_ivey_fan

10-23-2005, 10:15 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
wouldnt even be as good or fun as taking an 8th and a half of shrooms.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYP

[/ QUOTE ]

all shrooms are not created equal. big differences in what you could describe as "levels of intensity". I recommend going to a-dam and trying a couple different kinds then my point will be more understandable.

10-23-2005, 01:02 PM

[ QUOTE ]
you, having no independant thought process, beleive it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, because smart people try all the drugs for themselves and make up their own minds like smart independent thinkers.

Jackass.

10-23-2005, 01:06 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The addictive nature of heroin is overblown. I have dabbled in it 2-4 times per year for over 20 years and have yet to become addicted.

[/ QUOTE ]

For every idiot like you there are 50 people crashing in an AIDS ward.

One hit CAN get your body chemically addicted. I know this from a personal family experience.

SheetWise

10-23-2005, 01:25 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Based only on long term consequences...

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

For instance, if your're using heroin your whole life, you're going to 'need' it more often than is reasonable.
In short, your opinion needs more explanation.

[/ QUOTE ]
My point was only that heroin is the most physically innocuous drug you will ever find. To use it once has no consequences (assuming safe dosage with both). Like others, I've heard from many users that quitting smoking was harder than kicking smack -- and while that's anecdotal evidence, I believe it. I've used both, and I don't understand the attraction to heroin. But then, I never understood the attraction to ludes either.

Blarg

10-23-2005, 01:36 PM

Roy Munson

10-23-2005, 01:53 PM

There are more idiots out here like me than you care to acknowledge. I live in Baltimore, Maryland and if there is one thing that we know about in this town it is heroin. More people than you know are infrequent heroin dabblers who maintain good jobs and satisfying relationships.

Because it is a "taboo" topic many will not admit to heroin use but you better believe that they are out there.

The sensationalist drug horror stories that we are bombarded with are partially responsible for and perpetuate the drug problems that truly do exist.

Hermlord

10-23-2005, 01:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Heroin is more addictive physically and mentally, but hardly to the point that one dose hooks you for life. In fact cigarettes are far more addictive statistically.

[/ QUOTE ]

1. this is an extremely ignorant statement. statistically? please. how many ppl use heroin. now divide that by the number of ppl who smoke cigarettes...

2. your statement is still wrong. one hit of heroin is way more addictive than one cigarette. two hits of heroin is way more addictive than 2 cigarettes. and so on and so forth...

[/ QUOTE ]

10% of heroin users become addicted; 32% of smokers (http://www.reason.com/0306/fe.js.h.shtml)
Nicotine is only quasi-addictive (http://student.biology.arizona.edu/honors96/group7/drugs.htm)
Nicotine and heroin are comparable (http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/library/basicfax.htm)
Comparable (http://users.lycaeum.org/~sky/data/drugs.html)
Comparable (http://www.drugwarfacts.org/addictiv.htm)
Subjective description of heroin addiction (http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/heroin/heroin_addiction1.shtml)

I guess my statement was pretty ignorant, in that addiction is a complex phenomenon with several metrics: withdrawal, tolerance, frequency, psychological dependence, etc. It seems reasonable to say that heroin produces extreme addiction in a small percentage of users, while nicotine produces a moderate addiction in a high percentage of users.

Re. #1, I was referring to the first article, in that a higher percentage of people who try nicotine become addicted compared to the percentage who try heroin. I now believe this is true but incomplete.