Corpus

"In the province of the mind what one believes to be true either is true, or becomes true within certain limits. These limits are to be found experimentally and experientially. When so found these limits turn out to be beliefs to be transcended. In the province of the mind there are no limits. However, in the province of the body there are definite limits not to be transcended".

I like this. The mind is not to be abolished and if we think of it as the 6th sense gate having it permanently stilled (which I guess some non-meditators imagine to be the goal of meditation) would be to diminish ones experience. Like losing the faculty of hearing, or vision.

Pardon the clumsy English, but awareness just is. It "bes" itself and is not observable, because any "observer" is within it, and yet it is known despite being unobservable. Perhaps you are observing "a form", somewhat conceptual, to which the referent "awareness" is being applied. Giving it a label allows you to manipulate it in your mind and consider it but the label is always at least one step away from that to which it refers.

Some nations' governments mandate fluoridation of the water; other nations mandate fortifying certain food staples/ ingredients with folic acid.

Think of the character as a navigation-device which serves during certain social and many professional situations; there is a part to play in such scenarios and the character is employed to do the job. The more pressurised the nature of the encounter the more it solidifies, certainly in the professional sphere, yet without it a certain efficiency is not achieved.

OK. You are aware that fentanyl is typically used transdermally, trans-mucosally, by injection and vaporization? You are also aware that no oral preparation of fentanyl- as in swallowed- exists because of the much poorer bioavailability via this route? Meaning one would have to really heavily adulterate an oral prep such as methadone to make the fentanyl effective. Economically it makes little/no sense to do this for a dealer, to adulterate in this way. If the methadone was so heavily adulterated with fentanyl, such that it amps up the buzz, and the deceased was a casual user he would not wake up if we are blaming his death on opioids; if he was prescribed it then it would be unadulterated.

Yes, but the timeline of events doesn't suggest it was. The story as presented does not fit in with his methadone being adulterated with fentanyl to a significant degree or at all, as one would not expect him to wake up 2 hours later un-befuddled. Occams razor applies until the toxicology/PM is done.

If you are a long-term opioid user who is habituated one can be prescribed methadone usually as an oral syrup (less commonly pills or very rarely IM amps) and this is known as MMT (methadone maintenance therapy). It stabilises ones lifestyle from the rigours of criminal association, acquisitive crime etc, and keeps withdrawal at bay whilst providing little in the way of a high. It has less recreational potential than the other agents once one has a habit, but for the occasional user it is pretty impressive. It is also long-acting and is usually just dosed once daily. In terms of black market methadone, some who are prescribed it may sell it (if they are not made to consume it under observation at the clinic/pharmacy) and use the proceeds to buy something more recreational. Some may buy it for something to fall back on if their opioid of choice (heroin, oxycodone, hydromorphone and also fentanyl) becomes harder to locate as it will keep them from getting dope-sick. But to answer your question, it does exist as a legally prescribed medication, and some black market diversion does happen, but it is not a preferred option for most.

@docs20 Some good points. As a doctor-to be () considering the limited history presented it doesn't suggest that the methadone need be cut with fentanyl (and if he was on MMT he would get the "pure stuff" from the pharmacy) when you consider that he woke up 2 hours later apparently sober and with-it enough to get the 5 MeO DMT pipe out. Also, taking lorazepam with the methadone and still waking 2 hours later could suggest a degree of tolerance to either/both. If his methadone was cut with a super-potent mu agonist one would expect him not to wake so promptly with apparent sobriety if the combined dosage was approaching toxic levels. Another pharmacological factor to consider is that methadone is composed typically of a racemic mix of isomers, one of which has antagonist effects at the NMDA receptor where ketamine also acts. Irrespective of the exact sequence of events, cause of death will likely be multi-factorial and attributed to poly-substance abuse, and the more agents detected will "confirm" the cause, and yet a post mortem might reveal something completely unanticipated which could also alter the picture.

A simple question as asked sadly has many facets to it. Using a single test kit may confirm DMT is present but might fail to identify anything else which may also be there. Using multiple different reagent/test-kits might allow a better differentiation of what other psychoactives might be there, but won't quantify them.If its been cut with a simple bulking agent which is not psychoactive then you have a whole new set of issues to contend with. Almost all NN DMT these days tends to be extracted rather than lab-synthesised as it is not difficult to do, and most places on the planet will have a natural source plant substance available. Know your source; ask the right questions but "best" of all is to become familiar with the process of extraction. Such questions of purity will not arise. Depending on the tek used/starting substance getting a purity of 85% upwards is eminently possible.

The details are incomplete ie was methadone being used as maintenance therapy, or just for kicks ie occasional use? This alters the pharmacodynamics re plasma levels. Also he had consumed 2 other respiratory depressants (alcohol and a benzodiazepine) which on their own have a small respiratory effect but amplify the effect when taken concurrently, and this is before the methadone is considered. The brainstem respiratory centre also "utilises" serotoninergic neurones and may go a little way in explaining why people subjectively get that "I cannot breathe" sensation after vaping NN DMT.

@Barbara Perhaps you could explain how diploma vs degree pans out in Portugal in terms of opportunities, utility etc? @kbone 's advice seems soundest to me currently.

Absolutely- the level of consciousness will govern if a debate or true discussion ensues. Teaching alters the tenor of the dynamic if super-added to either, and learning can ensue. Being in a position of responsibility such as you hold can make that level of interaction potentially hazardous to your security of tenure and reputation, and can impose additional potential stressors . But I doubt I am telling you something you didn't know. Such is how it is, but polarization of views prompts an investigative curiosity in a portion of those minded to grow. Good job Sir- but make sure they pass their exams!

Thanks for confirming that. It can make quoting them a pain! I also hope your "quote of my quote" was answered above. I find that debate, discussion, teaching and presentation are all distinct, subtly. All offer value but conflating them can be problematic.

What I hoped to convey was that debates are by their very nature adversarial in contrast to a discussion which seeks to grow the participants. Yet the latter can stem from the former if those involved allow it to. Efficiency tends to relate to an outcome, and people start at where they are at, and a variety of approaches are necessary. Vaush vs Poole means nothing to me as I am not based in the USA. And undoubtedly communication dynamics will be different in a psychedelic retreat but again, are not uninfluenced by what the participants bring there in terms of any positions they may hold, and how firmly. Those who attend such retreats are "self-selecting" in a sense. I agree fully. Let us see what unfolds. As an aside- this latter quote was added after I quoted the first bit. Are mods excluded from having to admit to additions/corrections to their posts?

Debates are like a fight to reverse anothers' position, and this flows from each participant. Openness is needed if any learning is to happen and this could mean consciously adopting some humility and an enquiring nature such that one can admit they might know less than another. At higher conscious levels, debating with someone oriented to argue his position is like trying to teach a foreign language to a guy that is drunk and vomiting.

Regarding delusions, we have the "power of language" at work again; it implies, infers and defines. Back in the day when studying the psychiatry component of the medical degree, delusions were defined as "A belief that is clearly false, indicating an abnormality of thought content, and that cannot be accounted for by the persons cultural or religious background, or level of intelligence". If I look at the terms which comprise the definition, and the nebulous nature of these, it reminds me of why I never took to the discipline with great enthusiasm. A psychiatrist may or may not see the definition as I do, and in respect of the vid above, would probably subconsciously "feel" that it is applicable and valid as they focus on the claim made re concentration camps/fluoride which seems to have made it into a portion of the publics consciousness with no firm evidence. Truth and lunacy- a heady mix and perspectival, depending on where one approaches it from.

Could you elaborate on the distinction "formal student" a little? Do you have formal students, and are these distinct from video-watchers/participants on the forum? I find much of value here but the notion that you are teaching seems a little woolly. It is a tricky position that you hold/ have chosen to hold.

Perhaps considering what each of us mean by the term "physical reality" would be helpful. In terms of appearances becoming evident de novo, ie not as a distortion of some current appearance, this is entirely possible but the consistently productive route to this in terms of via a chemical ingestion is not something which is recommended. That is "no big deal" via the anti-cholinergic tropane alkaloids such as scopolamine, as found in the Datura/Brugmansia species. I reiterate- not recommended as these compounds are seriously hazardous/potentially lethal.,

If taking multiple tabs, always take one to gauge the strength, and ignore any marketing. Also if the same brand is purchased at different times never assume they will be the same- this oversight has caught out people before. Same print does not necessarily mean the amount on them is the same. 400-500mcg LSD is a serious dose if truly 400-500mcg is ingested. Most people can't imagine with accuracy how much they can actually handle until they find themselves in the throes of a trip they cannot manage. Spare yourself the trauma.

So you plan to take 3-4 tabs? You can vaguely gauge the strength of the anticipated trip if you know what one delivers but to conclude, beyond a sales-pitch, that this is actually in the range of 400-500mcg is probably inaccurate. An average tab dose is closer to 60-70mcg generally speaking when formally analysed. Even so, 4 of these average tabs would still be heavy. Tripping alone I agree is best but one should always attend to the mind-set and setting, just to be as safe as possible.

How can you be certain that the trip which was not very strong was 375mcg? Have you firmly established this to be the case? Personally, having experienced verified doses of LSD, I would abhor the idea of consuming 400+mcg of LSD alone, even if fully fed!

"Words dissemble, words be quick, words resemble walking-sticks. Plant them, watch them grow; watch them waver so". @Mu_ - good stuff.

I will try. If I were to ask you, right now, to just sit with your eyes closed and discern how you are feeling by "observing" the visceral tone of your present condition before labelling it, you might notice a sense of contraction in your guts/chest which, depending on its nature for you, might lead to the conclusion that you are feeling bored, tense, interested, engaged etc, ie the mind has labelled it thus based on a life-time of recognising it, and a familiarity with how ones subsequent thoughts would "confirm" this. Once identified, note that ones thoughts (of boredom, tension, interest, engagement) build upon the pre-existing feeling, perhaps just amping it up, or modifying it in some way, but however this is, it is in keeping with ones preliminary identification. I am pointing out how thoughts and feelings are intrinsically linked, sustaining each other via a type of feedback. Now the almost constant persistence of a visceral tone and its ebbing and flowing in perfect conjunction with ones inner dialogue is in essence what the enduring ("irrefutable") sense of self is, a process which can be recognized with practise as almost mechanical; the thought part is what makes it "real". On a hefty dose of psychedelic, the feedback loop is distorted as more fluid thoughts evoke a magnified and less "well known" (ie novel, unfamiliar) perception of the visceral tone, which will further distort the subsequent thoughts setting up a type of jagged resonance within the loop, which at some point produces uncertainty and.....psychic chaos has been seeded. Calling it an experience is perhaps inaccurate; it is more of a state of being as when within it, there is no perspective to cast upon it. Being alert to ones visceral tone and how it can colour ones sense of well-being, which includes over different time-frames, means one pays much more attention to ones mindset before deciding to partake of a psychedelic, and an appreciation of the feedback loops construction allows one to tolerate the novel feelings they evoke without the need for reifying the direction of the subsequent thoughts, which is a skilled way of surrendering/navigating, and when "sees" that the feelings are always in flux one is able to just float with the changing nature of it all.

SSRIs are in some ways a triumph of marketing over substance eg they have not been demonstrated to be more effective than the older tricyclic antidepressants but do have the benefit of being much less lethal in overdose and have a less broad range of side-effects. This is not to understate the side-effects that many do experience especially in the initial few weeks of use (gastrointestinal effects being particularly common). Certainly they do help many people (but so do the tricyclics) and emotional blunting is "regarded as a good result" in others when the spiky edges of ones depressed mood become smoothed out, but this is not a restoration to a "happy state" but more like an attenuation of the misery. Depression seems to be a label attached to a constellation of subjective/observable features and elicits a reflex response of the application of strategies from a fixed list without a consideration of how these features are produced. IMO, these include life experience and programming, biology, neurochemistry, genetic aspects etc, but we live in a quick-fix, do-what-you-can time where it becomes expedient (but superficial) to smear filler to the cracked plasterwork rather than evaluate the underlying brickwork for problems.