Talk:Learn to Take Drugs

Marijuana Facts!!! (Sources included)

I saw a lot of things wrong with the marijuana section. Most notably the myth that marijuana is bad for your lungs. Here's some quick things to read. It would be alot easier to read it here.

http://forum.explosm.net/showthread.php?t=17794&highlight=marijuana

1) Weed does not cause cancer. And studies show it actully decreases cancer and tumors! http://
<a href="http://en.wi...#thc</a>
2) Weed does not cause emphasema, or any other threatening damage to the lungs. "The effects of tobacco and cannabis smoking differ, however, as they affect different parts of the respiratory tract: whereas tobacco tends to penetrate to the smaller, peripheral passageways of the lungs, cannabis tends to concentrate on the larger, central passageways. One consequence of this is that cannabis, unlike tobacco, does not appear to cause emphysema." 3)We spend +10 BILLION a year keeping marijuana illegal. http://www.mjlegal.org/cost.html http://www.prohibitioncosts.org/ 4)We put 700,000 people (nonvioeltn people.) in jail every year for marijuana use. Some getting up to life! In an already dramaticly crowded prison system! "Marijuana arrests in the United States doubled between 1991 and 1995. In 1995, more than one-half-million people were arrested for marijuana offenses. Eighty-six percent of them were arrested for marijuana possession. Hundreds of thousands of people are now in prison or marijuana offenses. An even greater number are punished with probation, fines, and civil sanctions, including having their property seized, their driver's license revoked, and their employment terminated. Despite these civil and criminal sanctions, marijuana continues to be readily available and widely used." http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...schlosser.html http://www.tikkun.org/rabbi_lerner/inprisonformarijuana 5)Marijuana is not addictive. http://newton.nap.edu/html/marimed/ch3.html SAMHSA (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration). 1998. National Household Survey on Drug Abuse: Population Estimates 1997. DHHS Pub. No. (SMA) 98-3250. Rockville, MD: SAMHSA, Office of Applied Studies. 6) Weed does not (at least dramaticly) affect driving. they do not necessarily reflect 'impairment' in terms of performance effectiveness since few studies report increased accident risk http://www.dft.gov.uk/stellent/group...ty_504567.hcsp 7) Weed does not affect infant development. A study of the development of 59 Jamaican children, one-half of the sample's mothers used marijuana during pregnancy, was research from birth to age 5 years... The results over the entire research period showed no significant differences in development testing outcomes between using and non-using mothers." J.S. Hayes, R. Lampart, M.C. Dreher, L. Morgan (Sept 1991). "Five-year follow-up of rural Jamaican children whose mothers used marijuana during pregnancy". West Indian Medical Journal 40 (3): 120-3. M.C. Dreher, K. Nugent, R. Hudgins (Feb 1994). "Prenatal Marijuana Exposure and Neonatal Outcomes in Jamaica: An Ethnographic Study". Pediatrics 93 (3): 254-260. 8)Marijuana isn't going to make you stupid, or a failure. Government studies often point to statistical data accumulated by methods like the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA), the Monitoring the Future study (MTF), and the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program, which claim lower school averages and higher dropout rates among users than nonusers, even though these differences are very small and may be exaggerated by the stigma attached to students who use the drug. However, the major contributor to a lack of credibility in these studies, is that in many cases, like with NHSDA and MTF, these surveys are usually self-administered and may or may not be anonymous. In response, independent studies of college students have shown that there was no difference in grade point average, and achievement, between marijuana users and nonusers H. Abadinsky (2004). Drugs: An Introduction, 5th edition, 62-77; 160-166. N.Q. Brill, R.L. Christie (1974). "Marihuana and Psychosocial Adjustment". Archives of General Psychiatry 31: 713-719. Here's 2 list of successful potheads, which includes everyone from polititions, to olympic atheletes, and nobel prize winning scientist. http://www.slatts.fsworld.co.uk/famous.htm http://www.veryimportantpotheads.com/main2.html 9)Marijuana use is not preventable, and the war on drugs is completely ineffective.. There is no evidence that anti-drug messages diminish young people's interest in drugs. Anti-drug campaigns in the schools and the media may even make drugs more attractive. Marijuana use among youth declined throughout the 1980s, and began increasing in the 1990s. This increase occurred despite young people's exposure to the most massive anti-marijuana campaign in American history. In a number of other countries, drug education programs are based on a "harm reduction" model, which seeks to reduce the drug-related harm among those young people who do experiment with drugs. http://www.cagw.org/site/DocServer/D...pdf?docID=1661 http://www.drugwardistortions.org/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:D...iceMarkUp2.jpg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:D...tsOnPrices.jpg http://www.drugpolicy.org/marijuana/factsmyths/ http://www.drugwarfacts.org/ 10)+70 MILLION americans have tried marijuana! http://www.hazelden.org/servlet/hazelden/go/INFO_MARIJUANA 11) Marijuana was made illegal because of Racism, Fear, Protection of Corporate Profits, Yellow Journalism, Ignorant, Incompetent, and/or Corrupt Legislators, Personal Career Advancement and Gree http://blogs.salon.com/0002762/stori...naIllegal.html http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...arijuana&hl=en 12) The illegal status of marijuana fuels organized crime and crime lords. It supports crime of all sorts, and leads to people taking harder drugs. http://www.hoboes.com/html/FireBlade/Editorials/Guests/Legalize.html http://www.balancedpolitics.org/mari...galization.htm

Please fix it. I helped somewhat. It's sad when stoner's are spreading the lies.

Heroin - Produced in Afghanistan?

...Oh, and Heroin IS produced by our allies in Afganistan, that HAS been liberated. Bold text The Original Author 18:50, 11.3.2005 (CET +2)

Heroin IS produced by our allies in Afganistan, that HAS been liberated.

Heroin might as well be produced in Afganistan. Whether or not Afganistan has been "liberated" is the topic of a total different article - perhaps one fitting in the politics section of another web site. As for the use of "our allies," I must disagree that WikiAfterDark is a project built by contributors from all over the world (I'm from Greece, for instance). I don't see how Afganistan is an ally of all other (non-US) countries where WikiAfterDark contributors come from. For these reasons, I think it would be best to just say "Heroin is produced in Afganistan," which is a fact. I decided to add this edit to the article. If you disagree with me, please do not re-edit the article, but instead let's discuss about it in this Talk Page - that's what it is about, after all isn't it? Thanks. --dionyziz 10:52, 14 Mar 2005 (CST)

I do agree we should discuss it here. It is true that "our allies" is perhaps misleading. However, as the language of the site is english I assumed that since the current Afgan government is allied with all english speaking countries to my knowlege, this would be okay.

Not only that, but actually, Greece is a major contributor of the multinational Nato-led mission that is according to the official mission statement "providing security aroung Kabul and in Afganistan". This mission is allied to the United States backed government of Afganistan, led by Hamid Karzai. This government is supported by the "Northern Allience" which was a major part of the war effort to rid Afganistan of the Taliban. The Taliban BTW stopped the production heroin. Not that I am/was a supporter of the Taliban or anything.

As far as liberation goes, well, that is a more difficult question. Afganistan IS refered to as having been liberated in numerous sources in the news media and by politicians and it IS true that the Taliban were a bunch of creeps and thus getting rid of them was a kind of liberation. Hamid Karzai and his allies may of course not be much better.

But actually, the main reason I think it is important to point out that where and by whom Heroin is produced is to give a sence of perspective on Heroin. Heroin is thought of as major problem in western societies and the root causes and the surrounding and contributing elments are often shrowded by heated debate and taboos.

The statement I made puts things in perspective. Though heroin is a problem, the production of it is sanctioned officially (at least to some degree) by the very governments that claim to resist it.

Also the comment is kind of funny, which I think is sort of the idea of this site, no?

The Original Author 0:45, 15.3.2005 (CET +2)

It's true that the attitude of this web site is mostly humorous and I understand why the fact that the US and EU being allied with Afghanistan while Heroin is freely produced there when, at the same time, they are considering the drug illegal is funny. This, however, doesn't mean that we can provide invalid, partially valid, or information that is subjective in this web. So, regarding the 'liberation' of Afghanistan; this is not generally accepted as a fact, and is a topic many people argue about. To see a different opinion than the one expressed mostly by the US media, you could do a Google Search for the liberated Afghanistan, which gives out many results. Clicking on one that seems to be of a different opinion randomly, I read the following text, quoting from here:

"The people of the world should know that although the despicable and oppressive rule of the Taliban is over in our ill-fated Afghanistan, this does not mean the end to hardship for our tortured nation. It is painful to hear some Western leaders and media speak frequently about the 'liberation' of Afghanistan. Contrary to the aspirations of our people and the expectations of the world community, the Northern Alliance, these brethren-in-creed of the Taliban, are once again in power and are generously supported by the US government. In fact, by reinstalling the warlords in Afghanistan, the US is ultimately replacing one fundamentalist regime with another. The Northern Alliance is nothing but a fragile coalition of bandits with a long list of crimes and brutalities."

I am not including parts of the article because I agree with this opinion, rather than to show you that Afghanistan having been liberated by the US is subjective. Both sides may be a little extreme, so I would advise we ommited the certain sentence in the article, since we want to only provide factual information.

Coming to English used in this web: You have a point in saying that the English-speaking countries, the US and the UK, are allied with Afghanistan. However, this web site being in English doesn't mean that its only contributors come from these two countries. English is used because it is considered to be the global language and the language of the internet, and not only because it is natively spoken by the founders of this web. As an example, I myself contribute more work to the English Wikipedia and not to the Greek Wikipedia, because I think it is a bigger project and worth submitting articles to it. Limiting the articles to the political beliefs of these two countries only because English is used is, in my opinion, a little selfish. I know that Greece contributed a lot to the war in Afghanistan, but that was not my point when I mentioned it; I just wanted to show you that a lot of users come from other countries (some of which may not have been involved in the "liberation" of Afghanistan).

Having said this, I think it would be the best solution to just declare Afghanistan as one of the countries where Heroin is produced in, and not state anything political-related in the certain article. In addition, I was wondering if Heroin is produced in Afghanistan exclusively, or if it is also produced in other countries as well. Perhaps we should add a few others too, if there are any, although I do not know which ones this may include.

--dionyziz 07:11, 15 Mar 2005 (CST)

ACK?

--dionyziz 15:05, 28 Mar 2005 (CST)

Heroin - The Best Drug in the World?

I think the part about heroin should be revised. It's too subjective : "Heroin by all accounts is the best drug in the world" "Very cool stuff and it will get you addicted quite quickly"

You're right. Revised. Thanks :-) dionyziz 08:20, 11 Mar 2005 (CST)

I revised it back. I saw alot of trouble writing that article and contributing to this site so I don't appreaceate someone fucking with it. If someone wishes to disagree with my assertion, that heroin is not the best drug in the world (it is quite simply the best, as it attaches directly to the brain's pleasure receptors, thus there can be no "better" drug) I dont mind a differing opinoin stated. But please do not screw around with my text so as to completely alter it. Thank you.

The Original Author 18:50, 11.3.2005 (CET +2)

It is not ok to say heroin is the best drug in the word, but you could isntead say.. " it attaches to the brains pleasure receptors etc..." I think he's right. Perhaps we should give a reason why Heroin is "the best drug in the world." Also, I don't see how a certain drug could be "the best," since different drugs have different effects (for example Amphetamines offer increased concentration, while Heroin does not).

PS: I added headlines/categorized this Talk Page so that we can keep track of each topic easier. If you think that it has been incorrectly arranged, feel free to change it back.

--dionyziz 07:11, 15 Mar 2005 (CST)

Using Aluminum as a Pipe

I don't understand why you deleted a warning about using aluminum as a pipe? So that's be reverted. Furthermore this is a wiki, it is meant to be alterable. If someone changes something you wrote, do not be offended. This site is intended to be an informational site and is meant to be objective. Saying "Heroin is the best" is very subjective since there are many downsides to heroin. It is not ok to say heroin is the best drug in the word, but you could isntead say.. " it attaches to the brains pleasure receptors etc...". Please do not reprimand the sites users for altering an articles content, for that is the point of a wiki.
Brian 14:26, 13 Mar 2005 (CST)

Because when inhaling through an aluminum can, you don't come into any more contact with the aluminum can than you would by drinking a soda from it. This is not, I think correct information.

I think it is VERY good that people can change things around and correct mistakes, but I do not find it constructive to screw around with complete articles. Adding things is okay too, as long as those things are correct too. Even humoristic additions I support whole heartedly.

People are less motivated to write things, if every time they come to write more stuff, the things they wrote were completely altered. Heroin being the best drug is not subjective, as it is based on solid scientific facts AND the personal experience of numerous users. It is of all substances in the world the one that causes the maximum amount of pleasure. Perhaps people who actually know what they are talking about should tell how things are.

I think it is okay to be offended if people completely alter something without good reason. The idea of a wiki is that people can write interesting informative (and at this site, perhaps slightly humoristic) articles. If people's articles are completely reworked, those doing the reworking might as well do the writing then.

The Original Author 16:30, 14.3.2005 (CET +2)

Check your facts, people.

Updating with numerous facts. main source: erowid. Lockeownzj00 18:57, 1 Apr 2005 (CST)

just checking it over...lots of work to do. if you don't mind, i'll update and add a buncha other drugs when i get around to it. Lockeownzj00 19:07, 1 Apr 2005 (CST)

Policy violation added

Cwolfsheep 12:37, 2 Apr 2005 (CST)

Talk:WikiAfterDark_Policy

I've flagged this article for review by the rest of the participants. This drug stuff is making me uncomfortable, and seems to take away from the site's intent.

why? while this pales in comparison to the great archive that is Erowid, it's important that people know how to do this correctly if they even choose to. It's societies prejudices and LACK of *any* knowledge about drugs that causes it to be "uncomfortable."

again, while this is half-assed, it's not baseless, and there are drug sites out there. how about reform instead of suppression? Lockeownzj00 21:33, 4 Apr 2005 (CDT)

Keep Andy 18:47, 27 Jul 2005 (CDT)

I would like to bring to mind the fact that truthful information seems to be the only thing that this site credible, and is a serious harm reduction practice. Erowid is only one source and many people do not dig deep enough to know its value. This site may attract an ignorant user and thus prevent the demise of an individual. Would that not be worthwhile?

This article needs some reworking, and I would like to help with that, ensuring its professional and objective. ministerjester 20:49, 7 Feb 2007 (EST)