Study finds magic mushrooms are the safest recreational drug

[Knocky's Nose]

ok mate.

Qat/Khat - about, what, a 1% risk of harm to others?

Bollocks. Half the African machete wielding limb-loppers are off their tits on the stuff when they go on the rampage!

 

[symyjym]

Why would you need to cross a road when you have sorted your setting and surroundings?

I guess one could be sensible or not sensible.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

https://www.theguardian.com/society...ogenic-mushrooms-safest-recreational-drug-lsd

Of the more than 12,000 people who reported taking psilocybin hallucinogenic mushrooms in 2016, just 0.2% of them said they needed emergency medical treatment – a rate at least five times lower than that for MDMA, LSD and cocaine. .

At that rate, if it were the chance of poking myself in the eye with my biro, I'd have been ****ing blind in both eyes decades ago. Good luck, shroomies

 

[Yes Chef]

Interesting stuff. I'm sure I heard that Sussex Uni were doing an experiment with Ketamine and found it lets you tap into a different level of consciousness.

With Ketamine you should just say neigh.

 

[sjamesb3466]

Never liked the idea of hallucinogens as I need to be in control and the fear of a bad trip would surely lead to an inevitable bad experience. Only bad experience I have seen was a friend who got himself stuck in some sort of mind loop whereby he was doubting his own existence and therefore was it possible for him to die. All in all he wrecked my buzz from the evening and settled once and for all that I wouldn't dabble in shrooms.

Nothing against anyone else doing them though as I think most sensible people know if they can handle them or not.

 

[Knocky's Nose]

It also rates the smoker of a packet of Benson & Hedges more dangerous to others than someone who's just tooted five lines of Coke!!

Where did that graph come from - the harmless bloke on LSD?

 

[StonehamPark]

Reminds me, must get the DMT ready for the morning.
Thanks.

 

[Triggaaar]

1-1

Yep, two own goals.

 

[Triggaaar]

Qat/Khat - about, what, a 1% risk of harm to others?

That's clearly not a percentage per use, or we'd have over a 70% chance of causing harm every time we have a drink. I've had my share of booze, and I'm not sure I've ever so much as harmed myself falling over.

 

[wakeytom]

It also rates the smoker of a packet of Benson & Hedges more dangerous to others than someone who's just tooted five lines of Coke!!

Where did that graph come from - the harmless bloke on LSD?

I cannot believe in this day and age people don't understand the dangers of passive smoking. But again smoking is legal so people can stand atop of their hill and look down at those horrible people taking illegal drugs, even if some are arguably safer and actually have health benefits

 

[beorhthelm]

That's clearly not a percentage per use, or we'd have over a 70% chance of causing harm every time we have a drink. I've had my share of booze, and I'm not sure I've ever so much as harmed myself falling over.

which highlights that its a pretty daft analysis. i dont know why some try to push the "harm" of alcohol when study after study show some health benefit to moderate drinking.