What prog music is best to do drugs to?

Guess this kind of music is not bearable without drugs!

But seriously this thread shouldn't be here on this site!! 

Prog music is not for belittlement and praising of drugs!

felona wrote: just as an aside Poxx, are you a chemist orinvolved in the medical world somehow ...  just curious

Full time meth synthesiza right 'ere, homie.

Nah, I have a fair share of (infinite) knowledge in chemistry, drugs and psychology.

I've probably read more Freud than a random dude from down the hall.

Trouserpress wrote:  And also cannabis itself DOES affect the brain permanently if taken regularly.

No it does not, at least not in the way that you think. When the chemicals has broken down completely and pissed out(which can take a while), there are no signs left that can be attributed directly to use of cannabis. It's the same principle as how music affects you, and how it makes you think differently, even after you've turned it off. But still, you can't hear the actual physical sound of the music after that, unless of course you're psychotic. The same goes for cannabis, you are not stoned when it has left your body, but you may change your perspective on things, become lazy. You will have trouble remembering things that has happened while stoned, until its out of the body.

Tony R wrote: Snow Dog wrote: Trouserpress wrote: oliverstoned wrote: Yes, but watching TV several hours a day is a very common -but harmful- addiction. Agreed. But that still rather depends on what one watches - if you actively watch intelligent television (which believe me, DOES exist, and I hope to one day add to it) and avoid the drivel then it can enhance your life rather than just fill up time/make you think less. Cannabis, however, is not "harmless". My friend who I mentioned earlier became a heavy cannabis user, lost all of their inclination to succeed in life, and soon moved on to harder drugs which had even more devastating effects. I will never forgive drugs for effectively ruining her, and anyone who suggests that cannabis is harmless is just plain wrong. I'd also like to state that I still support the legalisation of all drugs. Making their use a crime just exaccerbates things. Oh - and I drink tea, but not coffee. Never got on with it. And as Barbs says - there is f**king world of difference between tea and heroin. Silly argument. Being a heavy "anything" user will always cause problems! Moderation in everything is the key!   Let's not start an argument on just how ridiculous an epithet "moderation in everything" is. I cant/wont "moderately" love my wife and daughter. I dont advocate taking heroin " moderately". ETC,ETC..............................

No its not ridiculous if seen in context to my meaning. We are talking about drugs here not love fopr your famoliy., how can you imbibe love for your family anyway? Blatantly not what I was getting at.

I was talking of moderation of drinking, smoking, even eating.

I also don't advocate taking heroin moderately, but the point is that some people have addictive personalities and cant stop.

I've never taken it and nebver felt the need to.

Poxx wrote: felona wrote: Poxx wrote: felona wrote: It is also supposed to be an aphrodisiac due to  two particular substances, Phenylethylamin and Serotonin, both of which serve as anti-depressants. Although serotonin is released in the brain when consuming food and particular drugs, there is no actual serotonin in chocolate. Serotonin doesn't really "serve as an anti-depressant', it's rather one of the key chemicals that controls our mood. But the thing is, if you have low levels of serotonin you become depressed. Anti-depressants (SSRI's) increases the serotonin levels in the brain indirectly, in the same way that amphetamines increases the levels of dopamine in the brain. what would have more accurate for me to have said is that chocolate contains tryptophan which increases serotonin levels in the brain ... Yep, and it may seem like nitpicking from the perspective of the untrained eye, but it's not. It would be the same principle as if you were suggesting that oxygen contains haemoglobin.

just as an aside Poxx, are you a chemist orinvolved in the medical world somehow ...  just curious

Actually cannabis is harmless in theory, but because it can cause harm indirectly , It is not considered harmless.

Any given chemical + the stupidity and neurotica of human = harmful.

Cannabis leads to crack as much as apples leads to heroin.

Trouserpress wrote: oliverstoned wrote: Yes, but watching TV several hours a day is a very common -but harmful- addiction. Agreed. But that still rather depends on what one watches - if you actively watch intelligent television (which believe me, DOES exist, and I hope to one day add to it) and avoid the drivel then it can enhance your life rather than just fill up time/make you think less. Cannabis, however, is not "harmless". My friend who I mentioned earlier became a heavy cannabis user, lost all of their inclination to succeed in life, and soon moved on to harder drugs which had even more devastating effects. I will never forgive drugs for effectively ruining her, and anyone who suggests that cannabis is harmless is just plain wrong. I'd also like to state that I still support the legalisation of all drugs. Making their use a crime just exaccerbates things. Oh - and I drink tea, but not coffee. Never got on with it. And as Barbs says - there is f**king world of difference between tea and heroin. Silly argument.

Being a heavy "anything" user will always cause problems! Moderation in everything is the key!