LSD Microdosing Gaining Popularity For Silicon Valley Professionals (rollingstone.com) 446
An anonymous reader writes: Rolling Stone reports that an unusual new trend is popping up around the offices of Silicon Valley companies: taking tiny doses of LSD or other psychedelic drugs to increase productivity. "A microdose is about a tenth of the normal dose – around 10 micrograms of LSD, or 0.2-0.5 grams of mushrooms." According to the article, the average user is a 20-something looking to improve their creativity and problem-solving skills. Some users report that the LSD alleviates other problems, like anxiety or cluster headaches. That said, it's important to note that such benefits are not supported by scientific research — yet.
Important to note (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess it isn't important to note that this is a Schedule I compound? That many people are jailed for life over such things? That if they were not rich silicon valley elite there's a good chance their lives would be ruined for doing such a thing?
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Indeed.
I'm tired of the total acceptance of drug taking in the higher echelons of society. The little jokes in the media world about powdering your nose, about the use of Bolivian Marching Powder to help get through deadlines.
These are drugs, no matter how wealthy or powerful you are, and using these drugs helps criminals.
Let's have a little equality.
Re:Important to note (Score:5, Insightful)
Right! Drugs should be available to all.
Re:Important to note (Score:5, Insightful)
Fortunately LSD has very little association with violent organized crime. The profit is way too low for them to bother, as it's not addictive (in fact, after taking it you cannot take it again within a few days).
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Important to note (Score:5, Informative)
What you heard (or *should* have heard) is that a large percentage of the LSD came from one lab, run by William Pickard [wikipedia.org], who was definitely not a biker.
Re: (Score:3)
I had a high school friend who was a fan of LSD. Saying it isn't addictive is a lie. He was constantly touting the benefits, which I didn't see in his life.
Having a negative impact on your life is not the same as being addictive. Eating candy bars can have a detrimental impact if you do it enough, but that doesn't make them addictive substances. Sounds like your friend was just a big fan.
Re: (Score:3)
That's not a good comparison. LSD is reportedly not addictive. Sugar is. (Mildly if taken in isolation.) Chocolate probably isn't, but it's usually packaged in a form that contains fats and sugar, which *is* an addictive combination.
P.S.: There are addictive personalities, and people who have them can easily become addicted to normally non-addictive substances. And there are also variations among people's chemistries, such that some of them readily become addicted to things that most people don't becom
Re:Important to note (Score:4, Insightful)
My point was really that we should take this enthusiasm and use it to push for legalization so it ISN'T just a rich man's game.
Instead over the past 10-15 years we have expanded prosecution of the Analog Act to ban anything REMOTELY psychedelic.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, let's stop it with this prohibition bullshit.
Re:Important to note (Score:5, Insightful)
Exactly: GP is attempting to fix the wrong problem...
Regulate, manage, tax, but don't prohibit except possibly a tiny number. Two of the four most harmful drugs are alcohol and nicotine so we should be able to regulate most of the rest at least as well...
Rgds
Damon
Re:Important to note (Score:4, Insightful)
Funny thing, strip the nicotine from the terrible delivery system (and the MAOIs it contains) and nicotine becomes much more benign.
But in general, most of the actual harm from drugs comes from the prohibition itself.
Re: (Score:3)
They are by no means the most harmful drugs. Belladona would be a good choice if that was what you were considering.
Tobacco and nicotine are two of the most attractive of the moderately harmful drugs. Most people aren't really attracted to strychnine.
What happened is there is a puritanical groups that seized control, and they decided that they had the right to tell everyone what they should be like, and that what they should be like is the way god made them. There are advantages to this as well as disadv
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
These are drugs, no matter how wealthy or powerful you are, and using these drugs helps criminals.
Only if you acquire them through illegal channels. If you can obtain them through your doctor (or from confiscated drugs if you have friends at DEA) you don't help criminals.
Still, being tired is the way your body tells you to slow down. While studies haven't been done on these drugs in particular we know that using caffeine instead of sleeping is bad for you in the long run. I don't see how any other drugs will be different.
Any substitute for sleep and relaxation is going to be a lot more complex than just
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The music industry has a well documented path for those who think this is the solution to higher creativity, higher productivity, and dealing with crunch times.
In fact, it is not hard to find a dozen well known names that have passed due to drug overdose, in the industry that "used" them just to get through the schedules.
And these aren't stupid people. They were good enough to learn how to play instruments better than you or I, train their voices for singing, and in some cases write their own music. They
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long
Re: (Score:3)
A memorable life experience was seeing a debate between Timothy Leary and G. Gordon Liddy. If you want to know what a life of using LSD is like, Leary was the poster child.
Of course, another memorable life experience was a mushroom shake in Haad Rin at the full moon party, but I digress...
Re: (Score:2)
It does not happen when they stay with psychedelics drugs, see ELP, Jethro Tull and the Grateful dead's. Ice cream, opiates and alcohol, and to some extends stimulants are what kill musicians.
Jethro Tull's front man, Ian Anderson, has never done drugs.
Re:Important to note (Score:4, Funny)
You forgot chicken sandwiches.
Re: (Score:2)
You are conflating psychedelic use with opiate use.
A friend of mine used to do Olympic style weightlifting (the competitive kind, not the bodybuilding). His coach used to tell him that back in the 60s and 70s, those guys would down anything they could get their hands on. None of it was very well researched, so there were lots of theories about which ones could potentially be "performance enhancing." LSD was definitely something they were using, and it wasn't uncommon to see lifters have complete freakouts on the platform (though to be fair, they were probab
Re:Important to note (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Wait, I'm confused. Exactly how does using these drugs help the US Government?
Re: (Score:2)
By spreading fear and creating a need for prisons for contractors, guards, cops, wardens, etc.
Re: (Score:3)
To your second point you have confused "using" with "possessing." Possessing them certainly helps them that way if they can catch you, and we are on the same wavelength of course, but when I am using LSD those silly men with tin badges can't do a thing. They certainly aren't going to find 5 to 500 micrograms of LSD in my system, and then confiscate it
It wasn't uncommon in the old days for people to circle up, an
Re: (Score:3)
there is literally no way they can arrest the 50 people in a circle for possession
I'd suggest taking a long hard look at how the federal conspiracy laws are written and utilized in this country. There are many many people rotting away in prisons across the US for doing a lot less association with "criminal activity" than what you've suggested here. Sucks but it's true.
Re:Important to note (Score:4, Insightful)
Absolutely. Maybe, LSD should not be prohibited to begin with. Maybe, nothing should be prohibited at all — citizens of a free country ought to have the right to kill themselves in any way they wish. But the rules must be the same for everyone.
On that note, I argue for automated law-enforcement wherever practical — such as with traffic-cameras, which would fine an upstanding resident of the same town just as much as passer-by from 2 states away.
Re: (Score:2)
So what? That's just anopion, not a logical argument. Also the only reason criminals are involved in illegal drugs is because the drugs are illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
If the worst thing about drugs is that buying them helps criminals, I think the solution to that would be easy...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Too bad he was deprived of his right to an attorney.
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed.
I'm tired of the total acceptance of drug taking in the higher echelons of society. The little jokes in the media world about powdering your nose, about the use of Bolivian Marching Powder to help get through deadlines.
These are drugs, no matter how wealthy or powerful you are, and using these drugs helps criminals.
Let's have a little equality.
You only help criminals by criminalizing drugs.
Re:and using these drugs helps criminals. (Score:2)
..., and using these drugs helps criminals.
On the contrary. Making these drugs illegal helps the criminals. If you could buy these drugs in the supermarket (like that other drug, alcohol), no criminal would be interested.
Re: Important to note (Score:2)
Re:Important to note (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm tired at the lack of acceptance, entirely based on ignorance and received disinformation.
The important question to ask is, how does the government have the right to tell people what they can and cannot consume? After all, it took a constitutional amendment to prohibit the sale and manufacture of alcohol, yet, they could not prohibit the consumption! Our forefathers still understood they did not possess this right over citizens. How was this lost? In what way are other drugs any different? Indeed, most recreational drugs are, if not entirely harmless, certainly less harmful than alcohol. The majority of harms associated with drug use are a direct result of prohibition, not the drugs themselves. The truth is, the government does not have this right. Drug prohibition is simply unconstitutional. The federal government has usurped the Constitution via the Commerce Clause, which has been interpreted to allow the government to do practically anything.
Why does drug-taking help criminals? Because taking drugs has been criminalized. Let us not forget that all drug prohibition has its roots in racism. "Health" is a much later justification, a justification made necessary by the slow erosion of the acceptability of overt racism, and made possible only by prohibition itself.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, let's have a little equality. Legalise and/or medicalise all drugs, disband the DEA permanently, and stop feeding the prison industry's insatiable appetite for nonviolent human beings.
That's right. And in your happy fantasy world, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms is the name of store....
Re: (Score:2)
As a drug it is safer, at a pharmaceutical level of purity, than alcohol. However, street acid can be a bit spotting in terms of quality.
If you're a $100k/yr engineer (Score:5, Insightful)
So when poor people show up in wealthy neighborhoods they not only stick out like a swore thumb, but odds are good the cops can bust them for the drugs at least one of them is carrying. This keeps poor people out of wealthy school districts and parks, and lets the wealthy enjoy their (much, much better) public services.
Basically, our drug policy is central to maintaining our class divide...
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, that is correct. It i not important to note that for numerous reasons. The first and most obvious is that your statement is US specific, and there is rest of a whole world outside US Borders. But that isn't the biggest reason the information is completely irrelevant. This is a matter of science. While the power mongers would love to be able to legislate the facts, they can only misrepresent them in order to pass offensive laws;
Obvious idea (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, I'm surprised that it's taken so long for this idea to be tried.
LSD was the first of the serotonin-modification drugs to be discovered; and apparently the most potent of them. The problem with LSD use in the '50s and '60s was that the doses were so high that the users went off on psychedelic trips. Serotonin modification drugs developed later, starting with the SSRI family such as Prozac and its derivatives and work-alike compounds, turned out to be very valuable in treating depression (although they have their own side effects). The idea of switching back to the original serotonin-modification drug, LSD, but using it at a dosage that doesn't cause the tripping, always seemed like an obvious approach to try.
Re:Obvious idea (Score:5, Funny)
"The problem with LSD use in the '50s and '60s ... "
Problem? What problem?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
"The problem with LSD use in the '50s and '60s ... "
Problem? What problem?
60s? What 60s?
Re: (Score:3)
SSRIs, the same drugs that a large fraction of the general US population is on.
Re: (Score:2)
The idea is not to get more of the populace taking those - that would be insane - the idea is to medicate people who have an actual depression.
I take sertraline (just 25mg, that is half of the usual starting dosage) to medicate my double depression and so far it has been a great help. For the first time in two decades I feel even-tempered and more or less happy with my life. There are side effects, but it is absolutely worth it.
The SSRIs probably aren't the cause for shootings, the underlying depression, wh
Microdosing? (Score:2)
Now I understand (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
I must have taken the wrong drugs, because all I see is the Internet of Colors.
Have sales persons done this for years? (Score:2)
This might just explain some of the product/service claims that sales persons tend to make.
The problem... (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem I see with this - and base this statement on first hand experience - is that you either tend to be very distracted and always looking at the next thing, or you tend to be incredible focused on one single thing for a very long time.
Granted, dosing wasn't an exact science and far from measured, much less consistency of product between uses. And the only "micro" part of any dose I did was when a friend found some 15+ year old purple microdots when he was moving (they still worked, sorta... only had a couple and there were 4 or 5 of us sharing them and we all ended up adding some blotter to our systems to really get going)
Re: (Score:3)
My brain is like that already without any help from drugs! So does this mean I'm living a free, perpetual low-level acid trip?
Re: (Score:2)
That is why you need a good project manager.
NEEDED: Project manager with 2+ years experience in mobile application development and 5+ years guiding psychedelic journeys. Strong Objective-C skills, CPR training, and soothing voice a plus. Job responsibilities include managing deadlines and freakouts. Applicants should include resume, cover letter, and a freehand sketch of a random design drawn while listening to a jam band.
Welp That explains a lot (Score:2)
Micro doses of potent drugs explains the whole concept of windows 8 and a lot of the invisible features of iphone operating systems. Yep - I've been wondering if they were on drugs as the current designs kinda look like it.
Or... just hear me out now... (Score:2)
We could take a break when we hit a creative block.
Re: (Score:3)
We could take a break when we hit a creative block.
Take that crap with you to Canada, you Commie.
Old News. (Score:2)
Digging through older code the only logical conclusion I can reach is a lot of LSD must have been involved.
Reply All did a Podcast on this (Score:2)
The Reply All podcast did an episode on this. One of the podcasters even went as far as microdosing himself to see if it really worked. It made for an interesting show:
https://gimletmedia.com/episod... [gimletmedia.com]
(I don't work for Gimlet. I just thought that it was a good episode.)
The MBA who thought he was God. (Score:2)
Now I think I know what he was on. We knew he didn't know what he was talking about and he spewed out Death by PowerPoint that was so bad.
He had to have been on something like LSD to convince himself that he was so damn good, or a damned God.
Very short half life.
How do they measure the dosing? (Score:2)
LSD doses at tripping strength are tiny by measurement standards. How are they cutting something measured in such tiny amounts with any accuracy? And how do they know the strength of their sources?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
LSD doses at tripping strength are tiny by measurement standards. How are they cutting something measured in such tiny amounts with any accuracy? And how do they know the strength of their sources?
This, and also, we know how people are.
If they don't get that creative flash with 10 micrograms, they'll keep taking more throughout the day.
And then he's going to try to drive home.
What could possibly go wrong? (Score:2)
Whatever fancy term you call it, taking drugs at work doesn't sound like an entirely sane thing to do, and most certainly not a longterm solution to anything. Because you just know it will become somewhat compulsory once this new creativity becomes the new norm and you won't be able to keep up sober. Oh, Silly Cone Valley...
LSD does have benefits (Score:2)
It can help reduce prison recidivism. See http://www.psypost.org/2014/01... [psypost.org]
The first studies on this were done in the 50's and 60's by Leary et. al. , who also pioneered the use of group therapy for prisoners.
It also seems to help alcoholics. If you google it up you will find that it has a huge potential for therapeutic use and Further research.
Despite growing evedence for useful applications of LSD it was banned in 1966 in a "Reefer Madness" like hysteria.
Re: (Score:2)
The therapeutic uses I heard of have always coupled it with therapy in a group guided by an experienced professional.
LSD? Silicon Valley? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds.
Re: (Score:2)
'scuse me while I kiss this guy.
If you know that it was really "Kiss the sky" would you like the song less or more?
If "The Sky" is an air marshal that fancies himself a superhero, then exactly the same amount.
Re: (Score:2)
If you wanna kiss this guy, better learn how to kneel
Because you're very short?
Re:Increase productivity?? (Score:5, Interesting)
Have you ever tried LSD? The effect is somewhat different from what you think, possibly; a major component is that it works like speed, to some extent, and it keeps going for ~8 hours. I'm not sure how much work I would be able to do in that state, but I know some people can (John Lennon famously did at least for a while). I've only ever taken large doses, but even then you don't simply disappear into a wild maelstrom of hallucinations - it is more controllable than that. But you do get inspirations and ideas pouring into your mind all the time - I got tired of it in the end.
Re:Increase productivity?? (Score:5, Insightful)
I was thinking that this explains a lot of the daft UI design we've seen recently.
Some of the great ideas while programming on LSD.. (Score:3)
Re:Increase productivity?? (Score:5, Interesting)
Please do not confuse taking a ten strip at Burning Man as being analogous with a true ++++ on the Shulgin Scale. Once you start pushing above 1mg, weird shit does happen. The dosage I just gave was NOT a misprint, puddles and prints will go 1 or 2 orders of magnitude beyond that. It's one thing to climb a mountain, another to stand on the plateau at the top and an entirely different experience when you jump off the cliff into the maw of eternity. Don't take my word for it, get on the bus and ask any knowledgeable member of the Family.
But my goal isn't to diminish your experience... our job is to shed light and not to master. The idea that a threshold dose is preferable is bit absurd though. Once could easily have ++ or a +/- from the exact same dose at different times. Each experience is unique unto itself and some times is independent of dosage. I've learned by personal experience that a low dose trip can produce a negative feedback loop into a bad trip easier that a large dose. Probably because I flirted with and fixated on the illusion of control versus just surrendering to the experience.
"Once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right!"
Re: (Score:2)
> No, and I never will. Only an idiot would sacrifice their mental health for a few hours of tripping.
So you won't ever know if its actually idiotic or not.
Re: (Score:2)
"Have you ever tried LSD? "
No, and I never will. Only an idiot would sacrifice their mental health for a few hours of tripping.
'Mental health' is way overvalued.
Re: (Score:3)
I have been on the other LSD.
Re: (Score:2)
Only an idiot would sacrifice their mental health for a few hours of tripping.
If LSD meant 'sacrificing your mental health' then it would be stupid, agreed. Fortunately this isn't the case - I know this from experience, whereas you don't. But hey, no problem, I don't particularly need to convince you.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't remember being drunk and unable to function for 16 hours after a pint of beer.
Re: (Score:2)
try a bottle of bourbon. 1 pint is approximately equal to 1/10th of a bottle of bourbon.
Re:Increase productivity?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed - self-reported results have little credibility (see homeopathy), and those of psychoactive substance use are particularly suspect.
And neither productivity nor creativity gains, even if real, are worth much unless accompanied by good judgement.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, even though the hallucinogen use may not directly interfere with judgment, if it gives exaggerated feelings of insight that still tends to distort a person's perceptions about what is true and important.
Re:Increase productivity?? (Score:5, Insightful)
His post was saying "don't trust a drug user, get some real data." Seems reasonable. Recreational drug users always espouse the benefits of their drugs. If they didn't believe, they wouldn't use them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Increase productivity?? (Score:5, Interesting)
That is what all studies with drugs have found, that I have looked at. Alcohol does not actually make you a better driver, nor you objectively more handsome, it just impairs your judgement of these things.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Amphetamine can make you cleverer if you do not abuse them. Look at Paul Erdos
Re:Increase productivity?? (Score:5, Insightful)
There haven't been very many studies (Score:2)
If you want a good example of an "evil" drug that isn't look at Sly Stalone's Steroid use. Sure, it needs to be done under a doctor's supervision, but he's living the life of a man in his 30s while in his 60s. Meanwhile the rest of us pleebs can't get that because baseball and football have vilified the drug.
Re:Increase productivity?? (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't think so. A small increase in creativity for a short period of time maybe. Though quite possibly it makes you *think* you're being more productive, just like people who take concaine *think* they're being incredibly interesting when they chat, whereas usually the complete opposite is the case.
Same with ethanol. Nothing is more annoying than walking into a party where people have been drinking. It usually takes me a couple drinks before they stop being asshats.
Re: (Score:2)
He's admitting to his own judgment becoming similarly impaired, at which point the (other) intoxicated people seem less annoying.
Bingo!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
ive tried just about everything that grows on plants, ive done lsd a few times before and for the past few years ive basically been tripping twice a year because i like it. My honest opinion? i highly doubt this works as advertised for the exact same reason you give. Furthermore, most people that i know who do lsd more often keep having "genius" ideas that have absolutely no real world application or practical value, the times i did lsd i kept having grand ideas aswell that just dont look as good once you s
Re: (Score:3)
Technically, what they say is interesting to themselves. They've just stopped caring whether anyone else thinks the same.
Not trying to get anyone here to develop a habit, but it always seemed to me that cocaine is a drug that would help shy and anxious people and would turn already confident people into overconfident assholes. Sort of like alcohol, I guess.
Re:Increase productivity?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Comparing recreational doses of cocaine to microdoses of LSD is an apples-to-oranges comparison though. Cocaine is a stimulant; LSD is a hallucinogen; it would make more sense to compare it to marijuana, although all these drugs have radically different (and very complex) mechanisms of action. Because we call them all "illegal drugs" doesn't mean they're the same thing or act the same way. Even the same drug at different dosages can have dramatically different effects.
It's very plausible that microdoses of LSD produce illusory creativity, since many drugs do indeed undermine self-perception -- not that that tends to be very reliable in humans anyway. But drugs are unlikely in my opinion to be a substitute for struggle in the creative process. Creativity has two components: novelty and appropriateness. Drugs are an easy way to get to novelty, but when it comes to judging appropriateness there's no substitute for plain, naked struggle with the obvious but inadequate approaches to a problem. Only then, after you've been forced to gain a deep and intimate connection to the problem's constraints, can some kind of flash of insight do you any good. Until you've struggled with a problem your insights are worthless, whether or not they come to you in a flash.
So it's essentially inconceivable that any drug could make you creative. However it seems plausible that some drugs could act as a kind of adjuvant to creative struggle when you're approaching a creative breakthrough. Such breakthroughs often come at a time when you're critical faculties are slightly deranged; when you're exhausted; dropping off to sleep; or just say "screw it for now" and do something unrelated.
Note that "plausible" isn't the same as "probable", much less "likely". The problem with information with drugs is that it's almost always slanted one way or the other. For example I think MDMA has a lot of potential to alleviate suffering, however research on it has been restricted by the fear that if it proves useful then controlling its recreational use will become harder. On the other hand I wouldn't take the word of recreational users and dealers unquestioningly either; I can easily find people who swear by homeopathy. There's a distinct lack of objectivity and reliability in information about recreational drugs.
The "good" news, I think, is that there's no substitute for creative struggle; and I think you can mentally train yourself to make that leap of intuition once struggle has prepared you.
Re: (Score:2)
So it's essentially inconceivable that any drug could make you creative. However it seems plausible that some drugs could act as a kind of adjuvant to creative struggle when you're approaching a creative breakthrough. Such breakthroughs often come at a time when you're critical faculties are slightly deranged; when you're exhausted; dropping off to sleep; or just say "screw it for now" and do something unrelated.
Hell, I've solved weird computer problems before with a case of beer sitting next to me. I'm one of those weird people where micro-doses of ethanol -- say, downing can after can of Pabst Blue Ribbon -- actually mostly has a stimulant effect. It excites the part of my brain that likes alcohol but it doesn't get me drunk enough, fast enough to have the "downer" effect that it's supposed to have. (Real ale, wine, liquor, different story.) It will actually allow me to stay up all night, and at around 3am -- et
Re: (Score:3)
This phenomenon has a name: The Ballmer Peak [xkcd.com]
FTFY.
Re:Increase productivity?? (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's my anecdote: Many interesting ideas I had back in the day came to me under the influence of pot. Some of those ideas brought me a great deal of money.
I never said this doesn't happen, but your reasoning is post hoc ergo propter hoc: your ideas came to you while you were stoned, therefore they must have come from the pot. In order to conclude that you'd have to have done all of your thinking about the problems while you were stoned.
As I said, I think it quite plausible that drugs can, at the right time, help you escape the limitations of self-censorship in your thinking. But in my experience people who are stoned all the time certainly have novel ideas, but those ideas aren't particularly useful. That's because creativity actually involves a kind of interplay of critical and imaginative thinking. Enough people have anecdotes like yours to think there's something to it, but the very nature of creativity -- at least as I'm defining it -- makes me doubt you can get it entirely out of a bottle.
For the record, I consider creativity the finding of novel approaches to a thing that are better in some way than pre-existing approaches. This almost certainly presupposes an intimate familiarity with pre-existing approaches, unless we count pure dumb luck as creativity. Picasso, for example, didn't draw the way he did because he couldn't to realistic work. He had very good drawing skills, and his early works were representational [wikiart.org]. That level of draftsmanship doesn't come without struggle; and from that he derived his interest in geometric figures, most easily seen in the development [wikiart.org] of his landscapes [google.com]. Note if "House in the Field" seems a bit crude, it was painted when he was twelve years old.
Re: (Score:2)
Double Porn cures everything?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Xanax and Valium are drugs....
Re: (Score:2)
I bet he could write a basic Slashdot post even if very high on LSD, Once he eventually realized you don't know what a subject line is for, he would laugh his off for quite some time at such a ludicrous act, and then he would read it in it's entirety: "Timothy Leary really is dead Or he is really pissed off. He'd probably consider this drug abuse.", and would just be baffled, asking himself? "Where the hell would this guy get that idea?
Re: (Score:2)
you diseased weak minded truth hating freaks
I think that's a big yes on the adverse psychological effects.