[karen1977]

LMAO! Is that true? Surely not- it'd be funny if it had though.

[Warwick]

It is absolutely true... the stuff was invented by German chemists in 1908, and used as an anti-depressant and a slimming aid, with success. The feeling of cheerful warmth and happiness it produced were noted by the German High Command, who thought it ideal to give to their men as a 'Christmas treat', rather than good food and drink.

If you investigate the incident (as I have done), you will find all the initial approaches came first from the Germans, not the French or British - though they joined in with the spirit of it all once the barriers came down. The Germans actually took substantial risks, since suspicions of some trick were rife. Significantly, there are accounts of Tommies being greatly surprised by the friendliness and generosity of their no-longer enemies at the time, and had no idea what had come over them, assuming an especially large issue of schnapps was responsible.

IMHO this is a very, very sad story, as WW1 could have ended there and then... but the stupid, arrogant bastards in charge wouldn't have it. In fact it filled them with horror, the ultimate nightmare of any general. Even more sadly, this story (which is fact, the German records exist to prove it) is still officially denied by the military even today, since our government has decided that Ecstasy is a harmful, subversive and dangerous drug - even though it kills less than one in several million people who take it, unlike tobacco, alcohol and paracetamol... but that's enough politics!

Before anyone asks, yes I have, and am a far better person for it... but wouldn't recommend anyone else does the same without great care, it doesn't work like that for everyone!

[karen1977]

Well, you learn something new every day! It is a travesty if it's true - but what do we expect from people whose profession is 'peace'? Peace? Don't make me laugh; warmongers, the lot of em! And yes, i have too, and yes, it was very nice indeed - like an internal hug. Definitely not for everyone and wouldn't recommend, but statistically less risky than eating peanuts, reaction-wise. Watched a documentary ages ago, about a psychotherapist in America, who treated terminally ill patients & their partners. She was at the time risking jail in a very controversial, yet very beneficial therapy; she was prescribing her patients and their other halves MDMA. She believed this helped them to discuss issues that would otherwise be too raw to deal with. They were able to talk about death and plan their funerals with far more ease as a result. All patients were very happy with this method of therapy; they said instead of spending the last few weeks in torment and anguish, they spent every last minute declaring and demonstrating their love for one another. They said it gave their dying partners dignity and some bravery in the face of death & gave them irreplacable opportunities to spend the last few days just loving one another, making the greiving process a more cathartic and positive experience. And she could've been jailed for it - why? It just doesn't make sense.

[Warwick]

Hi Karen - I quite agree, the political ambitions and ignorant prejudices of those in government (both here and in the USA) have lomg been placed before the medical needs of people who are ill. Ir's very sad indeed. Shuglin's book on the subject (he was the man who 'rediscovered' MDMA in the late 60's, and experimented with ir - and other related substances - on himself first) is well worth a read. Amongst his friends was a retired psychiatrist, who he gave a sample to... and when he saw him a few months later, he had started up a new practice, and was full of enthusiasm about the incredible theraputic effects, and incredible results he was achieving through using MDMA clinically. Shuglin himself witnessed dramatic beraking down of barriers in frinds and aquaintences who tried it, some of them getting over severe depression and mental hangups that they had suffered all their lives.

Unfortunately, the authorities stifled any theraputic use of the stuff by putting a blanket ban on it, once they heard it was 'fun to take'. I don't wish to promote its recreational use, but having a great deal of experience of 'recreation' myself over the years (ahem!), I know very well where I would choose to party, offered a choice between alcohol and E! Never any trouble... unlike booze, which I have seen kill people both slowly and quickly, causing endless misery, violence and damage. Unfortunately, it would be much harder to tax... so will stay banned.

On a personal note, it opened a door that has never closed since, a door that led to many wonderful things, and more previously unknown doors. I have no doubt I am a much better person for the experience(s), and have been awakened to much good - with no physical or mental ill-effects (quite the opposite!).

Cheers...

[karen1977]

Being a member of the 'chemical generation', i'd have to say it wasn't so much recreation for me as a love-affair! LSD was the one that really got my attention - still have nothing bad to say about it 17 years on. Ecstacy was lovely, but nothing can compare to the first time & it does drain seratonin, so for me it was a twice a year thing only. Speed was great for finishing finer details in my artwork, but the come-down outweighed the benefits so i didn't make a habit out of it. Never touched heroin or cocaine, because i don't fancy prostitution or street-robbery as an occupation. There's experimentation, then there's asking for trouble...have been given morphine on a few occasions in hospital & had i not been in agony at the time, i imagine it would've felt very nice. Sadly, gallstones took the shine off the experience, but i can remember (vaguely) an feeling of instant warmth, like being wrapped up in a blanket, and a weird tingling sensation across the roof of my mouth - if that's what it does when you're in severe pain, then it's no wonder it's so addictive. This is precisely the reason ive always given it a very wide berth - i imagine it's TOO nice, if you know what i mean. Cocaine's just speed that costs ten times more, makes you talk drivel all night & spend all your time hiding in the toilets - waste of time and money & kills creativity. Weed is no more a drug than caffeine and far less of a drug as tobacco.
I know all too well the effects that alcohol can have & the hell it puts both the abuser & their loved ones through. My husband is a recovering alcoholic, who at the height of his illness, went AWOL for four days and had to be sectioned. He dabbled a little, but drink was his preferred drug. It's very interesting that i was a little 'junkie' in my youth but never had much time for drink and to date no psychiatric addmissions; my hubbie sticks to the nice legal, taxable drug & it almost destroyed his life. And i think that is what they call ironic. They expect drug-users to be drooling nit-wits with low I.Q.'s and a dysfunctional family, but i'm proof, and so are you, that that is not always the case. i'm intelligent and free-thinking & i abide by MY law - exactly the same as THE law, but with common sense,lol.

[Warwick]

Ahem, thanks for that Karen... how strange it is the way these 'threads' get tangled? Nice though, even so...
How well I recall that first trip (in 1976, mercifully just after I took my A levels, and not before or during!). I suspect that the availability of pre-operation julie microdots may have adversely affected my concentration at University however, but it was certainly very good fun....
Unfortunately, I suffered a bad accident in 1977, which brought on bouts of depression and panic attacks, so i never touched the stuff again... 'mind no longer up to it' etc etc...
Not for about 18 years anyway, adter rediscovering the pleasures of all-night partying at the age of 40, accompanied by a delightful little rave bunny, er, I mean 'companion', who showed me what I'd been missing in the most delightful ways.
I was very lucky really, always in the company of good friends and good stuff, if you know what i mean. My first taste of MDMA was a profound experience, and it changed me forever... for the better. Opened my (somewhat bleary and blinkered) eyes to a new world, and new ways, and taught me the meaning of 'love' in many ways - love divorced from lust and sex (mostly, ahem), a sort of spiritual awakening i had never experienced before.
Having ended up in hospital, at death's door through alcohol (NOT good medication for depression, it worked for a while, but...), I was fairly sensible, never assuming this was the universal panacea, and cure for all my problems - such things don't exist in the chemical world, I sadly concluded long ago.
I'm always wary of sounding like some advertisment, or promoter of the stuff, which is something I never wish to do - it works very well indeed on me, I suffer from atypical (amphetamine responsive) depression, which is caused by a lack of serotonin, so this was like the elixir of life to me - it doesn't work like that on 'normal' people!
Whatever, one momentous night of disgraceful excess, I was offered half a brown pyramid - strong stuff! - and without thinking, said "thanks" and necked it... then realised half an hour later how incredibly STRONG the stuff was! Even so, something had changed in my brain, there was some kind of guardian angel there who kept saying"it's okay, don't panic, it's just the acid!", and preserved me from harm.... and then someone gave me a very powerful 'double dose' E, which i swallowed in one , thinking "well, if I'm gonna die, this is as good a time as any!" - how irresponsible! Twenty minutes later, I was... yes, well, never mind, let's just say that it was not an unpleasant experience...

This all happened about ten years ago, and it was long before I had my 'psychic awakening'. The first stirrings of that happened at the top of a heavily forested Welsh mountain, when i had a truly religious experience after taking some 'liquid acid'. This was no joke, and not an hullucination, I saw, and communicated with a very powerful spirit, which i identified as 'Pan' somehow... I sensed good and evil in perfect balance, it may look like a tree stump (which it was!), but there was an eye there, i know. Whatever, this shows the power of the stuff to open minds and hearts (which is why shamans have used similar hallucinogens for centuries, throughout the world).

It goes without saying, that any credibility about such observations and experiences is automatically 'blown' by most conventional people, who consider that a couple of pints of beer can make people see ghosts and flying saucers. I know otherwise however, and suspect you do too? I drew him as soon as I got home, from notes I made at the time...

[karen1977]

Very interesting. And i agree, alcohol stifles spirituality; in fact, a lot of the time it stifles humanity. All the crime, especially violent crime which is attributed to it & they're picking on people who smoke weed? It's just daft really. And now they're saying it can make you go insane! This is of course, piffle! A song actually highlights this perfectly (& quite amusingly); It's called 'The irony of it all' by The Streets, off their Original Pirate Material album. On the one side you have the law-abiding 'upstanding citizen', a violent, moronic drunkard & the criminal- a pill-taking, weed-smoking yet peaceful & rational student-type. You should check it out, it'll give you a laugh!
Like i say, not taken LSD in 17 years or so & i'm in no way advocating it, but i can't lie and say i hated it, or it somehow damaged me, because on the contrary, it was a positive & mind-opening experience which i'm glad i had.

[Warwick]

Summed up nicely there Karen, with of course the essential qualidication that "you wouldn't recommend it" to anyone! That's the trouble with discussions about drugs I find, my personal experiences have been positive, yet I have seen other people, taking the same stuff, having no fun at all. LSD is an incredibly powerful and potentially very dangerous drug, and can have disatrous effects. Anyone even remotely considering trying it should be completely prepared, both mentally and physically, and be in good and trustworthy company throughout.

I have been very lucky, for despite being pretty reckless and careless at times, I survived intact and never ran into serious trouble. Many others have not been so fortunate, which is something I always try to remember before relating wondrous and marvellous experiences I have had in the past... it's always going to sound like an irresposible, glowing recommendation! Or even worse, an advert.

I don't have any children of my own, which is just as well, as I'd have great difficulty coping with the subject of *drugs* I think? The children of friends have grown up around me however, and inevitably experimented with drugs, and got into trouble now and then. It seems to me they start a lot earlier and have far more opportunity/temptation/peer pressure than I did, which is slightly worrying... though they fortunately do have a more 'user friendly' selection of things to take (no MDMA in my day), and less chance of messing with the dangers of barbiturates. On the downside, there is ketamine and more heroin and cocaine around.

They of course have just as much curiousity as I once had, and know stern warnings of danger will only make that worse, so avoid that if possible. I have been "asked for advice" now and then, having a reputaion for being 'world wise' (or worldworn!) which is hard to deny. As one who was brought up by "do as I say, not as I do!" hypocrites, I loathe being like that, and consider it unfair to deny the fact that I have tried almost everything at some time, and usually enjoyed myself. I rely on the use of 'negative examples' in the event, saying things like "well, it is very nice to start with, but look at your uncle ****** - do you want to end up like him?", which seems to get the point across usually. Rhe result of all this is that I have unfortunately ended up appearing rather like Harvey Keitel's character in Pulp Fiction, organising clean ups and advising about where to hide things and what not to say to the police... how I do hate responsibility!

I'm sorry to say this Karen, but I'm not sure you atr quite correct about cannabis being harmless. When I 'started my career' - ahem! - it did seem to be, but the new strains of shunkweed that are available nowadays are another matter. A once very good friend grew the stuff, and with unlimited quantities always to hane, was somewhat on the greedy side of 'less than abstemious' shall we say? A couple of years ago I spent some time with him working on a project, and watched him gradually decline from a sharp witted, imaginitive and dynamic inspirer and instigator, into a paranoid, obsessive, drivelling idiot, who could do little more than load bongs, roll spliffs and rail at everyone and everything around him. That was sad to see, but he also became a bully, and a violent one at that - we nearly came to blows several tomes.
There was no point in trying to contradict him, he was always right and never at fault, which to me (an Aries who is always correct and never makes a mistake!) was... erm, let's just say, we no longer speak?
To be honest, it put me (and other mutual friends who were there) right off the stuff, although enjoyable at first I became bored with it after a while, and found smoking it at 10 AM didn't improve my concentration or work rate. My friend however (who like all madmen, woke at the crack of dawn, and thought everyone else should too) said it 'helped him to meditate', and routinely went into a deep meditative state mid-morning, which eventually became a relief for everyone else. Well, it did until I rather pointedly asked "do you always snore when you're meditating?", which didn't go down very well...

Although highly critical of my (admittedly) vast alcohol/amphetamine/cigarette/codeine consumption, he didn't seem to have a clue about wha I now realise was his disastrous decline - cannabis was 'safe' and that was that, no matter how many friends and loved ones thought otherwise. I'm afraid that as he drifted inro paranoia, they all drihted away...

I actually think you probably need to be a bit cracked to start off with, in order for the stuff to have such an ill effect, but if you are, concentrated THC can open that crack into a ravine pretty quickly. In the end, it is an 'escape', just like booze in some ways, and for every escape there seem to be consequeces and eventual recapture to face?

As addictions and dependencies are dependent on chemistry and the body, I sincerely hope they 'die' with it and will not continue trouble anyone in the next world.
Cheers and HNY
Warwick

[karen1977]

I agree it's not a wonder drug; it ruins your lungs for a kick off, but drive you mad? Mmmm.....I think you hit the nail on the head when you wrote 'you probably need to be a bit cracked in the first place' - of course, if you're unstable, it'll more than likely have a negative effect, but so would alcohol & that's my point - if they vilify cannabis use, they should also vilify alcohol consumption, but they don't & that's what gets my goat!
Half of all first time admissions to mental health units are alcohol-induced - my hubby one of them, so i know what im talking about from personal experience. If cannabis is as bad as they say, why have i never been sectioned? And if alcohol is as beneficial as they'll have you believe, why was he sectioned because of it?
It's the double-standards that bug me, and the ad campaigns with a guy who's been lobotomised from the looks of it, selling new brains to pot-heads who've worn out their old ones. This makes us out to all be witless, ignorant hedonists when that is not always the case; i wouldn't say that Paul McCartney was witless, and he's a big-time smoker - you don't make £800,000,000 by being witless!
I just think it's ridiculous to criminalise a big chunk of otherwise law-abiders, based on what they sometimes add to their rollies, that's all. As for my kids, they are always in bed and fast asleep before i even consider rolling a joint, then i smoke it next to the window & spray air freshener straight after - because it's illegal, not because i think it's wrong. I wish i could be open withthem, but i'd be admitting to them im breaking the law & as a parent, i don't think that's a good idea - i don't want to blur the line for them. By the same token, i don't want them doing it when they're older, but i don't want them to smoke either (typical hypocrite, i know, i know, but aren't all parents?) I don't like lying and i resent being made to feel like a criminal because of some ridiculous law that can never be enforced fully. The war on drugs? Don't make me laugh! As long as there is poverty, sadness, despair, abuse and broken homes, there will be drugs - it's just a sad fact of life, so rather than fight that which cannot be fought, i say legalise the lot, stick warnings on it like on *** boxes & refuse to treat on the NHS, like they do smokers (who now have less rights than prisoners, seeing as they can still smoke indoors). They'd make a fortune in tax & police could put their resources into catching real criminals, as all the dealers would be out of business as soon as it was legalised! Do you think drug dealers want drugs to be legalised? Not a chance! How will they make money then? I know it sounds radical, but can you honestly say if they legalised all drugs tomorrow, you'd go and try heroin? Of course you wouldn't & neither would i, or most sane people, come to that!- the only people who would take them were probably destined to take them anyway. Not because they're legal or illegal; but because of poverty, despair, abuse etc. It's these things we need to look at as a society - drugs are merely the symptoms of a sick society - we need to escape our reality, and drugs help us do this. If our reality was more palatable, maybe there'd be no void to fill, but sadly, that is not the case.

[Warwick]

ITA! The only reason alcohol isn't banned is that the government makes so much from it - likewise tobacco!

We are of course used to it after 5000 years plus of boozing, and it is of course easy to make from almost any fruit or veg to hand. I do wish that (for once!) governments would learn from history, before going off the deep end and starting unwinnable 'wars'.
As the Americans discovered back in the 1920's, *Prohibition Doesn't Work*!. Although the (uninforcible) laws against booze were repealed within a few years, they are still suffering the after effects even now, as it gave the perfect opportunity for the mob to become really powerful - a position they have managed to maintain ever since, by dealing in other illegal commodities....

Drugs and crime are of coutse inextricably linked, while drugs are deemed 'illegal', or banned. People will always seek, need and take them, no doubt about that, and banning them allows criminals and gangs to charge outrageous prices and make enormous profits. Their customers are meanwhile deemed to be criminals, for merely wishing to have a good time, expand their minds or make their dull, dreary lives bearable... and many turn to ctime themselves (often violent crime) to pay the absurd prices that the law has made it possible to charge. Ironic really?
The enormous profit made by drug dealers is of course untaked, and more likely to be spent on guns, CCTV cameras, bling and Cadillacs than social services or medical facilities.

Actually, guns are another example of how prohibition doesn't work. After WW1 and WW2, almost every grandpa had a Luger or Webley pistol in the attic/garden shed/sock drawer, and some had even better souveniers like Sten guns, Schmeissers and hand grenades... to the delight of certain irresponsible grandsons, ahem. My Great Great Uncle Horace had (as mantlepiece 'ornaments' in the front room) 20, 30 and 37mm armour piercing cannon shells, which polish up beautifully and look most impressive. I was told never to tough them again, by my ashen faced, trembling father, after saying "ooh, look dad!" and tossing one of these beauties to him, which luckily he caught... being an innocent child, I was unaware it was 'live', and probably had a couple of ounces of high explosive lurking inside the chrome like shell... tut tut! I wonder what happened to them.. must ask dad... but I am drifying OT again....
The point ie, although the country was awash with unregistered and lethal firearms, we had no terrifying wave of 'gun crime'. No, we had Dixon of Dock Green, who IIRC never needed kevlar and ceramic body armour to protect him, and didn't even pack a Taser or MACE, never mind a gun -he rarely ever drew his regulation police truncheon. Now guns are outlawed and draconian penalties inflicted on anyone found to have one, they have become desirable fashion accessories, highly desirable and expensive, a real status symbol for any young hoodlum wanting 'respect'. Ridiculous. No shoot outs in the days when anyone looking and sounding like a gentleman could stroll into the Army & Navy Store, buy a .45 'service pistol' or shotgun, plus several hundred rounds of ammo, sign a note saying he would be a good boy, adding his address and club memberships etc., then leave with it nicely wrapped in plain brown paper (so as not to worry passers by).

The same goes for knives, which were routinely carried by almost everyone until the 19th century (gentlemen had servants swords of course, or preferably servants armed with swords). Because of the ridiculous furore about them, and once again, solemn warnings and draconian penalties, no schoolkid or youngster feels safe unless he's packing one himself, since it's obviously so dangerous out there and everyone else is armed up and ready to stab. I myself have taken to carrying one recently, after being told there is an auromatic two year prison sentence for being found in posession of a swordstick, even if ir is an antique... denied the 'last resort' weapon of a gentleman, what can one do? Sherlock Holmes and Watson would soon be in big trouble!

In fact, if you wish to make a point about 'prohibition', the era of those two is a good example of how it works or doesn't work. To most people, the "Great Era of Drug Abuse" only began in the 1960's. There was no need for 'Wars on Drugs' back in the 'good old days', no apparent problems or public concern about addicts, pushers, pedlars, dealers, ruthless gangs of smugglers, and all the other ghastly things that foul narcotics and the evil of drug abuse is associated with. There was no outcry in the press or in Parliamrnt, apart from the odd raid on an opium den (run by fiendish Chinamen in Limehouse usually), the police were seldom bothered by drug barons and their thuggish henxmen... as there weren't any.

Rhat is not to say that drugs hadn't been invented yet, or were shunned by upright, sober Victorian and Georgian society, they were very populat indeed - even the old Queen herself used tincture of cannabis, and her father and grandfather's opiate consumption was almost legendary. Sherlock himself liked the buzz of cocaine, and shot of morphine to take the edge off now and then... he may have been fictional, but his habits were certainly not. Even so, there were very few trcorded 'drug problems' or even mere concerns about 'drug abuse' recorded in those days.
How was this achieved you may well ask, without modern policing aids and CCRV cameras on every corner, customs men with sniffer dogs and routind rectal probings of suspects? Quite simply, it was done by having sensible laws and government policies, which we no longer have. Anyone could go into an apothecary and buy guaranteed, quality, uncut drugs over the counter for a few pence, cheerfully provided in a paper wrap by an experienced druggist, who might say "I'd not take all that at once sir..." if required. Failing that, anyone could pop into their corner shop and purchase a pint or two of opium tincture for a few pennies, enough to cheer up an elephant for several days. The great secret of how 'drug problems' were avoided was quite simple therefore - even the poorest of the poor didn't have to go out burgling and robbing to afford stuff, or be forced break the law and associate with criminals in order to obtain what they needed/wanted/fancied. It was akso guaranteed by law to be of merchantable quality, reducing the likelihood of overdoses or dangerous impurities being added by greedy dealers.

That is my case M'Lud, in the matter of Public Interest vs Prohibition...