subjective effects have been described as “like being dragged to hell and back again. Many times. It is the most evil [thing] I’ve ever tried. It lasted an eternity.” Oh and it lasts up to 3 days. No gracias.
subjective effects have been described as “like being dragged to hell and back again. Many times. It is the most evil [thing] I’ve ever tried. It lasted an eternity.” Oh and it lasts up to 3 days. No gracias.
If you feel fine, you wait several days and try a bigger dose, then see if you feel any effects. Stop when it becomes unpleasant or unwise.
This is not safe. There is no safe way to ingest dozens of unknown chemicals. Somehow, chemists like Shulgin show that it's possible to test all those compounds on yourself and still live a long healthy life. Still, I would not recommend tempting fate.
If you absolutely must experiment, this method is a good for hopefully avoiding short-term adverse effects, but not long-term ones.
Much safer is to stick to substances that have a long history of safe human use.
That is despite a (smaller) subset of them being careful and methodical with dosage.
Personally, as a very squeamish person, I'm more than happy to stick with the tried and true, and in desperately boring moderate amounts :)
Yes this is aggressive, and yes I'm quite angry about how these laws have held back scientific progress.
Say what you will about the recreational drugs of the 20th century, their long-term effects are well understood.
> Much safer is to stick to substances that have a long history of safe human use.
Yeah, so much is clear, but saying "stick to the classic ones" when one brings up experimentation with new ones doesn't bring much new to the table. Much better to provide education up front on how to dosage new drugs (not just new to the world, but new to your body too) for the ones who do want to exist in that space.