Former conspiracy believer here

[Nick227]

But it is a cattle tranquiliser and I don't think the "recreational" doses people take, compare favorably to the quantities give to infants do they Nick? In fact they'd be closer to the doses given to animals, correct? So it's a bit rich claiming the media demonise special K, by calling it a cattle tranquiliser when you're trying to make it sound innocent when calling it a infant anthenestic.

I once had a guy on K try and climb out my car window, did I mention we were doing about 40mph at the time? (I should add I was sober) don't tell me it's a harmless drug.

8den,

Ketamine is a dissociative. You can't take a significant dose and climb out of a car window. The drug causes you to leave your body. You will simply lie down wherever you are within about 30 seconds of ingestion and be immobile for around 20 mins. The principle danger with ketamine is that you get trampled on by other people in parties. There's also anecdotal evidence of psychological addiction.

I imagine the dosage of active ketamine for infants and adults per kilo bodyweight is roughly the same, given the different methods of introduction into the system.

I'm not saying it's a harmless drug. I'm saying the media manipulate public opinion through the way they choose to report information about ketamine and other drugs.

Nick

 

[Nick227]

No, you said that pharms won't develop them, yet it was shown where they have done so numerous times. Nothing to talk about, except the fact that you were mistaken.

I think I was wrong to make such an extreme statement. I asked for more information so I could look at any pre-existing competing treatments for the medical conditions treated.

Pharmacology is now effectively a business, far more so than being a line of scientific endeavour.

Nick

 

[8den]

8den,

Ketamine is a dissociative. You can't take a significant dose and climb out of a car window. The drug causes you to leave your body. You will simply lie down wherever you are within about 30 seconds of ingestion and be immobile for around 20 mins. The principle danger with ketamine is that you get trampled on by other people in parties. There's also anecdotal evidence of psychological addiction.

Sorry no not true in every case. In this instance it was a first time user, who took a small amount, and was literally overwhelmed by the conversation going on around him.

I imagine the dosage of active ketamine for infants and adults per kilo bodyweight is roughly the same, given the different methods of introduction into the system.

I dont suppose you have anything to prove this?

Furthermore recreational use of ketamine doesn't have a "dose" a user injests however much ketamine he or she has, and chooses to take.

I'm not saying it's a harmless drug. I'm saying the media manipulate public opinion through the way they choose to report information about ketamine and other drugs.

Nick

Ketamine is a relatively obscure drug rarely mentioned in mainstream media, it's not really demonised to the degree E was.

You're still on your monolithic media as if the media speaks about drugs with one unified voice.

Oh and Nick again you've chosen to ignore this part;

Anyway Nick, any evidence that the CIA use heroin to fund black ops?

 

[Nick227]

Sorry no not true in every case. In this instance it was a first time user, who took a small amount, and was literally overwhelmed by the conversation going on around him.

Fair enough. I've heard that it takes 5 odd doses to "prime" the system. I still imagine it was a low dose or mixed with something else. I think the drug is usually not recommended, in clinical setting, for anyone with a prior history of acute psychiatric disturbance - psychosis, schizophrenia etc, not that I'm suggesting that your friend had these conditions, merely that it can be disturbing.

I dont suppose you have anything to prove this?

Well, the dosage to cause dissociation is very likely to be the same per kilo bodyweight, regardless of age.

Furthermore recreational use of ketamine doesn't have a "dose" a user injests however much ketamine he or she has, and chooses to take.

Well, you have about 20 seconds from the first bit of the line snorted before you're flat on your back and long gone, so I would submit that this does act as a basic restriction.

Ketamine is a relatively obscure drug rarely mentioned in mainstream media, it's not really demonised to the degree E was.

Agreed

You're still on your monolithic media as if the media speaks about drugs with one unified voice.

Can you find a good range of diversity in mainstream media attitude towards drugs? I'd say there's a little diversity between the highbrows and lowbrows but, this aside, it seems pretty monolithic to me. When did The Sun come out with a fair and representative opinion about drug abuse? (I suppose you might comment that they've never come out with a fair and representative opinion about anything, but I think drugs come off especially bad)

Oh and Nick again you've chosen to ignore this part;

Well, I did say a few posts back that I didn't have hard evidence. But they were involved in the cocaine trade in South America and they have stood accused of involvement in heroin trafficking in Afghanistan and SE Asia. I don't have hard evidence, no.

Nick

 

[8den]

Fair enough. I've heard that it takes 5 odd doses to "prime" the system. I still imagine it was a low dose or mixed with something else. I think the drug is usually not recommended, in clinical setting, for anyone with a prior history of acute psychiatric disturbance - psychosis, schizophrenia etc, not that I'm suggesting that your friend had these conditions, merely that it can be disturbing.

I don't think the drug is recommended as a recretional drug anywhere.

Well, the dosage to cause dissociation is very likely to be the same per kilo bodyweight, regardless of age.

I'm sorry Nick but you're neither a pharmacist or a doctor, you're in no position to voice an opinion in this matter.

Well, you have about 20 seconds from the first bit of the line snorted before you're flat on your back and long gone, so I would submit that this does act as a basic restriction.

Again I've met people who have done K and stayed standing immediately afterwards.

Nick you've been exposed as being factually inaccurate on several counts on this thread. Why should I take your word on anything. Particulary on matters that I have first hand experience of, that counter your claims.

Agreed

So you admit you lurid tales about K aren't media fodder means that the media aren't demonising ketamine?

Can you find a good range of diversity in mainstream media attitude towards drugs? I'd say there's a little diversity between the highbrows and lowbrows but, this aside, it seems pretty monolithic to me.

Are you going to reduce yourself to a Bill Hicks rant here? Hypothetically can you recall a highbrow or lowbrow op'ed that said "alcohol or heroin or fags are great"?

When did The Sun come out with a fair and representative opinion about drug abuse? (I suppose you might comment that they've never come out with a fair and representative opinion about anything, but I think drugs come off especially bad)

So do immirgrants, and dole scroungers etc. Your point? The sun is a polarising paper of extreme views, claiming that it represents the "media" is a gross diservice of anyone who works in the industry

Well, I did say a few posts back that I didn't have hard evidence. But they were involved in the cocaine trade in South America and they have stood accused of involvement in heroin trafficking in Afghanistan and SE Asia. I don't have hard evidence, no.

Nick

You've presented no evidence, hard or otherwise but are willing to claim that you are certain of this fact. Nick what on what grounds do you base your certanity? Upon what specific evidence, or accusations makes you certain that the CIA are involved in drug trafficing that funds black OPs?

 

[Nick227]

I don't think the drug is recommended as a recretional drug anywhere.

What drug, alcohol aside, is?

I'm sorry Nick but you're neither a pharmacist or a doctor, you're in no position to voice an opinion in this matter.

Again I've met people who have done K and stayed standing immediately afterwards.

Nick you've been exposed as being factually inaccurate on several counts on this thread. Why should I take your word on anything. Particulary on matters that I have first hand experience of, that counter your claims.

Look, if you're so interested, just take some. Mostly it comes originally as a liquid, you boil it down, chop it up and snort it. If you're still standing after 20 seconds you haven't taken so much! The drug is a dissociative, read the online medical science stuff. It primary medical use is that it makes you leave your body. The seat of your conscious awareness is off galavanting around the universe for 22 mins. Meanwhile doctors can do their stuff. There's a chap who works, or used to, at the Tooting Maudsley, by the name of Dr Karl Jansen. He wrote a book on it a few years back. Read, learn. It's good.

So you admit you lurid tales about K aren't media fodder means that the media aren't demonising ketamine?

I agreed the media don't demonise it to the degree they do Ecstasy.

So do immirgrants, and dole scroungers etc. Your point? The sun is a polarising paper of extreme views, claiming that it represents the "media" is a gross diservice of anyone who works in the industry

I thought it was the UK's best-selling newspaper. Frankly, the way you construe many arguments reminds me of a Sun hack.

You've presented no evidence, hard or otherwise but are willing to claim that you are certain of this fact. Nick what on what grounds do you base your certanity? Upon what specific evidence, or accusations makes you certain that the CIA are involved in drug trafficing that funds black OPs?

What I said was that, if betting money, I would definitely go for "the CIA are dirty" option. I would be grossly surprised if they hadn't been intimately involved in all kinds of drug-related dodginess for years, certainly including the heroin trade. Are you saying you'd put good money on the possibility that they haven't?

I come from a long genetic line of deeply suspicious, manipulative individuals. My half-brother Kia makes a fortune out of sneaking his way around the footballing regs. I know how easy it is to convince people of something they want to believe anyway. But, finally, honesty is exciting.

Nick

 

[PixyMisa]

Look, if you're so interested, just take some. Mostly it comes originally as a liquid, you boil it down, chop it up and snort it. If you're still standing after 20 seconds you haven't taken so much!

What a fine idea!

The drug is a dissociative, read the online medical science stuff. It primary medical use is that it makes you leave your body. The seat of your conscious awareness is off galavanting around the universe for 22 mins.

Riiiight.

 

[Myriad]

The drug is a dissociative, read the online medical science stuff. It primary medical use is that it makes you leave your body. The seat of your conscious awareness is off galavanting around the universe for 22 mins.

If the seat of your consciousness can gallivant into a nearby locked room for long enough to identify and remember some objects placed there, you can win a million dollars.

Respectfully,
Myriad

 

[gumboot]

Look, if you're so interested, just take some. Mostly it comes originally as a liquid, you boil it down, chop it up and snort it. If you're still standing after 20 seconds you haven't taken so much!

I believe encouraging others to partake in illegal acts is a violation of the forum rules.

-Gumboot

 

[Nick227]

I believe encouraging others to partake in illegal acts is a violation of the forum rules.

-Gumboot

Fair enough. I apologise. I was just trying to offer 8den the easiest solution to his dilemma.

Nick

ps - failing that, I would suggest anyone interested in the ketamine experience should consult the work of consultant psychiatrist Dr Karl Jansen

 

[8den]

Look just to summerise Nick's position on this thread as I see it.

Nick has claimed that western governments "love heroin and hate ecstasy"
Despite the fact that they are both illegal, you can go to prison for possessing either.

His basis for claiming that western governments love heroin, is that the US government don't allow the use of Ibogine as a heroin treatment. This is ignoring the fact that the US has a history of near schizophrenic drugs policy, and the fact that other governments allow the use of Ibogine as a drugs treatment.

He claims the Media (as a unified entity) demonise drugs. He also claims that the media did not report on the anti war protests pre Iraq and that the media were jingoistic cheerleaders at the start of the war. This ignores, for example, the detailed criticism of the pre War intelligence by the BBC. He claims the media are controlled, he offers no evidence to support this assertion.

He claims that the CIA are funding black ops through heroin sales. He admits he has no evidence, but is certain they are. He ignores the fact, for example, that claims that CIA were involved in the heroin trade in Afghanistan claim from soviet sources and cannot be considered reliable. None the less these claims, sans evidence, satisfy him.

I've no idea what his point about Ketamine is.

He claims the IMF and the World Bank have a sinister agenda. Again he offers no evidence to support this.

Is that right Nick. Have I missed anything?

 

[funk de fino]

Look, if you're so interested, just take some. Mostly it comes originally as a liquid, you boil it down, chop it up and snort it. If you're still standing after 20 seconds you haven't taken so much! The drug is a dissociative, read the online medical science stuff. It primary medical use is that it makes you leave your body. The seat of your conscious awareness is off galavanting around the universe for 22 mins. Meanwhile doctors can do their stuff. There's a chap who works, or used to, at the Tooting Maudsley, by the name of Dr Karl Jansen. He wrote a book on it a few years back. Read, learn. It's good.

I have and you are wrong, if taken properly it can be a good drug, most people take too much though and end up vegging. My experience generally bad and in fact as discussed the worst I have had in one case. You do somewhat travel out of your body but you are alert enough to know that is just the drug 99% of the time and you will be ok soon whereas with other drugs this is not the case. It does lead you to do things that may be potentially dangerous whereas Ecstasy does not. I have never ended up on my back after 20 seconds and unable to move or articulate any time i have taken it. You are wrong again.

I agreed the media don't demonise it to the degree they do Ecstasy

agreed

I thought it was the UK's best-selling newspaper. Frankly, the way you construe many arguments reminds me of a Sun hack.

Does not mean it is the majority media policy though. I bet all the other papers together sell more than it does so your use of this paper is flawed in this case. The Sun are scum BTW.

 

[Octavo]

I have and you are wrong, if taken properly it can be a good drug, most people take too much though and end up vegging. My experience generally bad and in fact as discussed the worst I have had in one case. You do somewhat travel out of your body but you are alert enough to know that is just the drug 99% of the time and you will be ok soon whereas with other drugs this is not the case.

I took Ketamine a few times and my experience was similar. Near complete loss of conscious body control and I felt as if my mind was watching my body from 2 or 3 feet above it. My mind was also surprisingly aware of what was happening. There wasn't the happy confusion associated with other drugs I've taken; it was more like I knew exactly what was going on and I was thinking clearly, I just couldn't communicate with my body - despite this, my body seemed to know what to do without my mind consciously directing it.

 

[Belz...]

Then disgard it and stop arguing. Would you continue arguing with someone who was, say, asserting that the world was being run by green pixies who lived in his left ear?

Because the guy's made a claim, and it's important to clarify why it's nonsense.

I hate ignorance. Don't you ?

 

[Belz...]

I have no idea who controls who. I'm saying that synarchy is an explanation consistent with much circumstantial evidence.

Which is also true of an infinite number of other explanations. This is why we use evidence to determine which one's the correct one.

Got any ?

 

[Nick227]

Look just to summerise Nick's position on this thread as I see it.

Nick has claimed that western governments "love heroin and hate ecstasy"
Despite the fact that they are both illegal, you can go to prison for possessing either.

His basis for claiming that western governments love heroin, is that the US government don't allow the use of Ibogine as a heroin treatment. This is ignoring the fact that the US has a history of near schizophrenic drugs policy, and the fact that other governments allow the use of Ibogine as a drugs treatment.

I'm not commenting on ibogaine's legal status. It's not relevant.

What's relevant is that the media, gov, and pharma all keep well away from a drug that would revolutionise the treatment of addiction worldwide. If you want to check the current thread here.
there is more debate. Perhaps it's more OnT to discuss this here.

He claims the Media (as a unified entity) demonise drugs. He also claims that the media did not report on the anti war protests pre Iraq and that the media were jingoistic cheerleaders at the start of the war.

I did not claim that the media did not report the anti-war protests. Check back. I did claim that their editorial position, at the beginning of the war, was jingoistic and very similar paper to paper.

This ignores, for example, the detailed criticism of the pre War intelligence by the BBC. He claims the media are controlled, he offers no evidence to support this assertion.

The evidence I offered is that the pattern of activity in media reporting every now and again, or on key issues such as drugs, resembles a large body under centralised control.

He claims that the CIA are funding black ops through heroin sales. He admits he has no evidence, but is certain they are. He ignores the fact, for example, that claims that CIA were involved in the heroin trade in Afghanistan claim from soviet sources and cannot be considered reliable. None the less these claims, sans evidence, satisfy him.

I take it you disregard Professor McCoy's book as well.

I've no idea what his point about Ketamine is.

Inadequate reporting in the media. Time and again the media report drug issues in a largely uniform and uninformed manner. Uniformly uninformed!

He claims the IMF and the World Bank have a sinister agenda. Again he offers no evidence to support this.

Actually, you yourself claimed they have a sinister hidden agenda in this post here. I'm merely stating that they have a subtly different sinister hidden agenda.

Is that right Nick. Have I missed anything?

You're getting there, albeit slowly

Nick

 

[Belz...]

For sure, nevertheless it's interesting how that which is symbolically portrayed on the reverse side of the Great Seal is pretty much precisely manifesting before our eyes.

Really ? Evidence ?

 

[Belz...]

The drug causes you to leave your body.

That's an odd statement if I ever saw one.

Of course, it can win you a million dollaws, so feel free to support it with evidence.

Can you find a good range of diversity in mainstream media attitude towards drugs? I'd say there's a little diversity between the highbrows and lowbrows but, this aside, it seems pretty monolithic to me.

That's because you probably don't read any of them.

 

[Belz...]

What's relevant is that the media, gov, and pharma all keep well away from a drug that would revolutionise the treatment of addiction worldwide.

Even were that true, how would that prove anything, other than the fact that they're following public opinion on pretty much all drugs ?

Actually, you yourself claimed they have a sinister hidden agenda in this post here. I'm merely stating that they have a subtly different sinister hidden agenda.

That's a horrible lie. You just read what you want to read. That's very dishonest of you.

 

[Nick227]

Even were that true, how would that prove anything, other than the fact that they're following public opinion on pretty much all drugs ?

They're creating public opinion on drugs.

That's a horrible lie. You just read what you want to read. That's very dishonest of you.

Well, let's take a look then. In response to my claim that the IMF and WB had followed a covert policy to further globalisation, 8den wrote:

Big first world countries exploiting the developing world for their own benefit. Gosh, thats a completely new phenomena never before seen in human history. Except for the Industrial revolution. And the Colonistation of Africa and India in the 19th century. Oh and the Spanish conquest of central America. Oh and the western expansion of the United States. And the entire British Empire. In fact any empire. Right back to the Romans.

Nick what you are describing is what has happened since trade began. Or indeed man wondered what was in the next valley.

Given that the WB and IMF were most definitely not set up to conquer the so-called "third world" for the benefit of the G7 nations, I would say that, in 8den's eyes, they clearly have followed a sinister hidden agenda.

You are disputing this?

Nick