Hacker News Reader

That's hardly a counterargument. GP said you were high all the time, that's different from being addicted. There is some overlap, depending on the substance, but also significant difference. Think of nicotine, caffeine (addictive, but no high) vs psilocybin (high but arguably not addictive).

View on HN

you literally can't be high all the time on psychedelics (at least tryptamine-derived psychedelics) because of how quickly a complete tolerance to their effect forms at the 5ht2a receptors

Microdosing isn't supposed to make you high. OP said they were taking /20 of a high dosing. So the assertion of "being high all the time" is sort of insulting.

I don't see how being high is an insult. OP didn't seem insulted to me.

I think incorrectly paraphrasing someone that misleads the conversation is insulting, perhaps that is a personal feeling of my own.

I could argue it's condescending to be insulted on the behalf of someone who's clearly not insulted, but how is this useful? We're all adults here, feelings are boring and irrational and they don't advance the discussion at all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com