My dosing theory for “scary” drugs (and a poke at the trashy values of the collective and how they affect me)

These drugs have two things in common; one is their incredible efficacy when used by rational, lucid people who want to live a full healthy life:

cocaine, amphetamine, methamphetamine, methylphenidate (narcolepsy, ADD, off-label depression)

morphine, heroin, codeine, oxy’s, opium, tramadol, buprenorphine (chronic pain, off-label depression, anxiety)

marijuana (sedation/stimulation, anxiety, pain relief, depression)

benzodiazepines, barbiturates (sedation, anxiety)

psilocybin (pain, depression)

The second thing they have in common is the difficulty getting a prescription for them because they are either illegal, or stupid people exist in the world; so instead of letting them voluntarily take themselves out of the gene pool like nature intended, the State, many moons ago, had taken upon its self the uninvited task of taking care of these dullards at the expense of my liberty and my right to procure the drug of my choice, in the name of some false “altruism” or “greater good” because maladroits get themselves into trouble with drugs (as if they wouldn’t without drugs); and somehow society would become a dangerous or less safe place otherwise, or some such nonsense.

It’s telling that, because we’re caught in this frame of nanny-statism and legalities, one of the main things drug researchers peel their eyes for, like hawks, are drugs that make us feel really good, too good, too soon. Fear of litigation is a reason we have “safe”, mediocre, usually inefficacious modern psychiatric drugs that have little value and crappy side-effects, yet are continually stuffed down the throats of trusting, half-witted souls, a few of whom actually get some benefit (bless you)… I wonder if visionary, progressive pdocs who have to dole out this junk feel any kind of guilt or frustration. I know that I would feel weary if I could not script, off-label, drugs like methamphetamine (desoxyn), laudanum (yes, it still exists in the pharm repertoire) or marijuana.

~But, I think there’s something else afoot here as well:

…”‘k, so you guys at MumsdrugCo have developed this drug that gets rid of depression. Right on; I could sure use it. Umm, can I try it? No? It makes volunteers in clinical studies too happy… so it’ll make me feel really good, and… we, don’t… want this… do we? ‘K, I guess you guys know what you’re doing… I suppose. Umm, I have to tell you though: all the antidepressants I’ve tried over the years have done nothing for me except make me feel worse. I felt better when I didn’t take them at all. I’ll tell you what did work very well, though; opium and dextroamphetamine; dextroamphetamine worked on an as-needed basis, maybe twice a week. Then I discovered that opium targeted as much of an extent what was wrong with me. Opium cycled on for a while, then cycled off for a month, then back on really does help me a lot.

“You say I shouldn’t do that? Why? I could get into trouble with it? Know something? I think you’re projecting; I think you could get into trouble with it because you would doubt yourselves in my situation. Know what else? I think, because you and the legislators who govern you don’t trust yourselves, you won’t let drugs through that could benefit so many smart people, and now we all have to suffer because of stupid people and your own self-doubt. And as usual, given the reigns of state authority, like any cop, doctor or politician, notwithstanding your fear of litigation, you feel free and qualified to impose your values upon me; and the things you value are more often than not, of little value.”

Jesus and John Galt wept.

~Certain patients who can’t take care of themselves or are not capable of thinking rationally or projecting plans for the future should follow the advice of their doctors only, and ignore the following…

…but for those of us who crave a happy productive life, “scary” drugs are, in my opinion, among the best for what ails rational people. Some get positive results from taking very small, scientific daily “lifting” doses, titrating up when necessary, then after a few months, tapering down and off for a period of time (maybe a month; maybe two); then starting again. I don’t think it’s in our interest to take any psych drug, pharm or not, continuously without cycling off (well, more serious cases like schizophrenia or bipolar might be a different story). The brain is plastic and in a state of constant homeostasis, and I think more harm than good results from a constant bombardment of exogenous chemicals… who do you want to be when you’re seventy?

…I would rather live a month or two with depression, knowing that I’m going to feel better again in a while when I resume dosing up, than take a chance that my personal chemistry hasn’t had a time of rest and a chance to get back to “normal”, as bad as “normal” might be (and who knows? maybe I’ll feel better drug-free for a while, or…?). I don’t want my neurons (at least) to be permanently twisted some day…

…so I think cycling on and off is the way to go if one doses every day. I’m in a cycling off period right now because, frankly, I think doctors are up their asses with daily scientific fixed dosing. I don’t buy into the theory that the body must take this smooth bombardment, on and on, even when the patient knows in their gut it’s time to taper off, at least for a while.

~So in one week I’ll be opiate-free, and will not take it for at least one month. I’ll keep you posted on how I feel during this time. It has not been hard to taper; I should say rather, it hasn’t been hard because I’ve had some great help from benzo’s for anxiety, trazodone to knock me for the night, and baclofen (an amazing wonder drug) for everything else; wow, this combo works well.

~Another dosing schedule is possible; if one prefers to not dose every day, dosing every three days, or twice a week can work too. It’s not “scientific”, in that the body doesn’t have a constant level of chemical within, but who can tell me that a doctor knows best what works for me if I achieve acceptable results taking a substance on an as-needed basis?… and besides, how do we know that it is not healthier to keep the body on alert and “guessing” what’s going to happen next, instead of on a predictable course of action that the body sees through, laughs at and compensates for?…

…so, when I start dosing again in about five weeks, I’m going to try this theory and let you know how it goes…

…I think we’re going to be pleasantly surprised.

~Now, if only these market products were available, unscripted, from legal vendors, would we finally be free to experiment openly and share our results with each other instead of having to skulk about on the net, like criminals. Imagine the added bonus of lower prices thanks to competition and no Organised Crime dictating cornered markets.

…oh well. I can dream for that day.

~Let me know what works for you. Feel free to talk about any drug used off-label for the last six months at least, and what your system is. I’m curious.

Advertisements

The Helpless Lamb & other pernicious lies

I’m a libertarian of the right, so have little patience for those who wish to coddle parasites and “victims” with my cash.

It’s curious that many of these takers keep their hair meticulously unkempt and dreadlocked, and make damn sure that they are seen to be “keepin’ it real” and living the romance and despair of it all. Ironically, they’re making an effort to do something. Guaranteed though, if my legally extorted money wasn’t keeping them alive, they would be either dead or cleaned up and supporting themselves with work.

This guy takes on the lie of the helpless lamb pretty well, though I don’t agree with his pragmatism and contemporary Canadian conservative tendency to give up and shrug in exhaustion…

So what’s the solution? Well, I think radical change is needed.

And that should include the distribution of both hard and soft drugs, such as  marijuana, – or their substitutes – through regular medical channels, via  doctors and pharmacists.

In other words, they should be dispensed in the same way as painkillers,  sleeping pills and other potentially addictive “medicines.”

Certainly, such a change would inevitably mean further expense for our public  health system. But those costs should be offset by savings in our criminal  justice system – keeping addicts out of clogged courts and crowded jails.

…”should be offset”? bullshit…

…you don’t just quasi-legalise drugs, expand the welfare state and hope things will work out. Things won’t. They’ll just get worse and more expensive. This line of thinking serves only to damage the person and the nation; and let’s admit it: what one permits, one promotes. So lets all take a deeeep breath and just legalise the damn stuff. The author of this piece isn’t a flaky socialist liberal, but as bad as any bleeding-heart who believes in the inherent goodness of maladroits are moralists who thoughtlessly and irrationally push pandering conservative politicians to ban these market products. Besides smarmy conservative pols, organised crime, the cops and pharmaceuticals are the only ones who benefit from illegal or “controlled” drugs. The fact that they’re illegal or controlled, and therefore bloody expensive, definitely doesn’t benefit me.

Want to make big cash real quick? Sell an illegal product with a huge demand, jack up the prices because the markets are so twisted by legislation and rake it in!

Want to be a happy police chief? Push to keep a product illegal, then because it’s a great excuse, grab more arbitrary power over the citizen and because more resources are needed, rake it in!

Want to be a happy drug company? Push to legalise illegal drugs on your terms, monopolise and rake it in!

…why do I vote?