Does each stage experience drugs differently?

[Egzoset]

And this is supposed to be a place illuminated by, euh...  Total darkness.  Absolute bigotry.  In short, the victorian age...

 

[Carl-Richard]

3 minutes ago, Egzoset said:

And this is supposed to be a place illuminated by, euh...  Total darkness.  Absolute bigotry.  In short, the victorian age...

You're obviously a stoner

[thisintegrated]

14 hours ago, Carl-Richard said:

Maybe for you. Not everybody gets addicted to drugs. The addiction rate for "hard drugs" is only a few percent higher than weed.

Pretty sure for weed it's something like one in a hundred that may get psychologically addicted.  For meth/heroin it's probably more like one in three people who get physically addicted.  Not even comparable.

[Carl-Richard]

10 hours ago, thisintegrated said:

Pretty sure for weed it's something like one in a hundred that may get psychologically addicted.  For meth/heroin it's probably more like one in three people who get physically addicted.  Not even comparable.

You're conflating addiction and pharmacological dependence.

The stats I've seen are 10% vs 20% chance of addiction for weed and heroin respectively.

Here weed is 9%, cocaine is 17% and heroin is 25%:

It should also be said that people who try hard drugs are already more likely to be addicts in the first place considering the gateway hypothesis, so that may skew the numbers.

[Topspin715]

I've never experimented with LSD, but I heard the story of when Ram Dass (Richard Alpert) traveled to India and met his guru in a village, Neem Karoli Baba, he gave him a fairly large dose to see if he could tell him what it was.  Ram Dass claimed that even though he took a large dose, he was not even noticeably affected by it.

 

He was supposed a deeply enlightened guru but I always found it intriguing that he supposedly wasn't impacted.  Anybody got any thoughts on that?