[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T2cAFRAX3Gs"]Here's an interesting video snippet[/ame] from a recent and reasonably well-balanced documentary on BBC Three on the marijuana where someone test drives a combination of cannaboids and TCH and then just pure THC.

Fascinating!

Be Well,

Michael Perez

That's some 'good shit', Michael...

I largely gave up cannabis as it kept getting stronger - I'd legalise natural cannabis and make skunk class A - unfortunately the law refuses to differentiate between skunk (evil) and cannabis (holy)...

Ho-hum, humans and their cravings for certainty...

Hi Michael, THC without the canniboids seem to have very frightening effects! It seems that a small amount of THC in cannabis has a positive effect so to speak, she looks pretty happy on the blend albeit in an altered state!

But pure THC frightening! It makes you think about all the drugs going round and that the people that take these drugs can't really know what's in them!

Violeta

I saw that documentary when it was on tv a few months back. It was pretty interesting in parts but overall I think it tried too hard to be 'balanced'.

People make the best choice available to them. People who knew about herbs like Passionflower taken orally would be more empowered.

I'm not at all convinced that people make the best choices available to them, and drugs are one classic example. I work some of the time with homeless mentally ill people, some of whom spend pretty much all their welfare money on drink and drugs, and will even get loans from the state (supposedly for things like cookers, clothing, etc) to acquire more.

Now, you could argue that they're doing so to alleviate misery etc and I'd buy that argument to some extent. But it warps the notion of what a 'best choice' is, given that they also have the option of doing less drink and drugs (I'm not expecting them to totally give them up, any more than I would any other members of society) and engaging with the possibility of constructing a future. Except we then come onto something that Bandler has noted, and I dare say others have similar observations: many people with substance addictions don't make representations of themselves experiencing the consequences of those addictions...meaning they lack the capacity to make the best choices available to them.

As for cannabis, you only have to talk to anyone working as a mental health nurse to hear about the increase in numbers of people being sectioned since skunk became widespread. That said, there's a danger that skunk is in danger of being demonised: it's by no means always the case that skunk is stronger than good old fashioned weed as smoked by people who listened to Neil Young rather than drum and bass.

I agree with you Adrian. People make the EASIEST choice available to them. Presuppositions are what are useful to believe but not necessarily true.

I also think sometimes people need to BELIEVE something often before they'll make internal representations or they'll get a negative K and stop making more pictures. If they BELIVE it and get a positive K they'll sometimes get in apostivity loop often V > K > V > K and so on.

Also it's not just internal reps, it's also the issue of overwhelm. It's not dreaming to achieve, it's internal reps with the order to get out. Overwhelm is usually when people can't make internal reps of the steps to get things done.

Adrian, do you find that MOST homeless people are mentally ill as many claim? I emphasised most, as opposed to some or a few.

Violeta wrote:

But pure THC frightening! It makes you think about all the drugs going round and that the people that take these drugs can't really know what's in them!

I know what you mean about the importance of knowing whats in something. At sonar electronic music festival in spain they were practical enough that they set up 'test' boothes where you could take any drugs for analysis before you consume without risk of the law getting involved. A practical way to give informed choice.

There's always a trade off between making something illegal and the pragmatics of what people will do anyway.

Illegality also drives markets with demand to new lengths. I really don't think the demand for every more concentrated forms of cannabis such as skunk that can be grown in small hidden spaces would have evolved without it being illegal.

Sam: most studies suggest that 20-25% of homeless people experience mental health problems.

John: I've got drug worker friends who offer similar testing services at clubs and festivals in the UK.

adrian r wrote:

I'm not at all convinced that people make the best choices available to them, and drugs are one classic example. I work some of the time with homeless mentally ill people, some of whom spend pretty much all their welfare money on drink and drugs, and will even get loans from the state (supposedly for things like cookers, clothing, etc) to acquire more.

Now, you could argue that they're doing so to alleviate misery etc and I'd buy that argument to some extent. But it warps the notion of what a 'best choice' is, given that they also have the option of doing less drink and drugs (I'm not expecting them to totally give them up, any more than I would any other members of society) and engaging with the possibility of constructing a future. Except we then come onto something that Bandler has noted, and I dare say others have similar observations: many people with substance addictions don't make representations of themselves experiencing the consequences of those addictions...meaning they lack the capacity to make the best choices available to them.

I too don't believe that people have ALL the resources they need within them and its a little generalization too far! Some required resources are skills which may still need to be learned. Not everyone has had the opportunity to learn some pretty basic stuff that many of us take for granted.

Some stuff takes a bit longer and more commitment to sort out because it will require some extended practice.

All the impressive rapid cases in change work in my opinion are when we can make use of utilization of either inbuilt abilities we are born with or skills we have already learned.

Sometimes a resource needs to be added rather than elicited! That can take time..

I thought it was good on a Paul McKenna programme (the fall out of love one), where he admitted the problem has two parts and said I can only help with the one part, the second you will have to go to somewhere else.. I respect that honesty Paul!

Here's an interesting thought, if they don't have the reources inside them (ie. past experineces or ability to make them up) then where do they get them from?

Hi,

John wrote:

Illegality also drives markets with demand to new lengths. I really don't think the demand for every more concentrated forms of cannabis such as skunk that can be grown in small hidden spaces would have evolved without it being illegal.

I agree John, if drugs like cannabis were treated the same as wine and sold legally with the same legislation there would be far fewer problems! It's all a hidden conspiracy led by financial and political interests!

That's my map anyway!

Violeta

'Resource' is a pretty meaningless term when describing thinking, it may be useful for NLP, but it's fundamentally meaningless in any 'real' context...

Brain itself is the resource - if you have one, you either learn how to use it or someone/something else teaches you and you either learn that or you don't...

Not criticizing, just think it needed reminding...

:cool:

As to what the various chemicals do,try GW Pharmaceutical

... some of whom spend pretty much all their welfare money on drink and drugs, and will even get loans from the state (supposedly for things like cookers, clothing, etc) to acquire more.

Now, you could argue that....

I think many argument will fall apart if we try to add our perceived rationale to someone elses behaviour. To the drug addict I am guessing that securing more drugs for the next hit outweighs the ideas of what WE think they should do.

Cannabis being legalised and monitored did not stop members of my stag do from passing out in Amsterdam and other members of the group hiding under their duvets 4 hours after the plane landed!

Any responsible person can use some pretty hard drugs with minimal problems and others can suffer at the hands of over 'drugs' like redbull or coffee.

Anyone here Bill Hicks fans?

"When you're high, you can do anything you normally do just as well. You just realize it's not worth the fucking effort. There's a difference."

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vX1CvW38cHA]YouTube - Bill Hicks - Positive Drug Story[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSH6ofHbeUw&feature=related]YouTube - Bill Hicks - Drugs and Evolution[/ame]

Thanks,

Matt

Sure, the relativism you point to is what I was getting at to combat the parroted notion that 'people make the best choices available to them'. Says who? In what circumstances?

adrian r wrote:

Sure, the relativism you point to is what I was getting at to combat the parroted notion that 'people make the best choices available to them'. Says who? In what circumstances?

That phrase only makes sense in regards to our own screwed up logic. It makes sense but only in terms of internal consistency of a belief system. It might make no sense whatsoever from outside the box.

Redsimo wrote:

I think many argument will fall apart if we try to add our perceived rationale to someone elses behaviour. To the drug addict I am guessing that securing more drugs for the next hit outweighs the ideas of what WE think they should do.

Cannabis being legalised and monitored did not stop members of my stag do from passing out in Amsterdam and other members of the group hiding under their duvets 4 hours after the plane landed!

Any responsible person can use some pretty hard drugs with minimal problems and others can suffer at the hands of over 'drugs' like redbull or coffee.

Anyone here Bill Hicks fans?

"When you're high, you can do anything you normally do just as well. You just realize it's not worth the fucking effort. There's a difference."

YouTube - Bill Hicks - Positive Drug Story

YouTube - Bill Hicks - Drugs and Evolution

Thanks,

Matt

I am a Bill Hicks fan,but though a lot of the things he said about drugs were much more sensible than the mass media's version,he did,IMO,go a little too far at times:along the lines of the "drugs and evolution"piece,saying that we have receptors for certain drugs in order to facilitate and speed up our evolution would imply that since we have endorphin receptors we therefore owe it to ourselves as human beings to start shooting ourselves up with heroin,and though,as he points out,Keith Richards suffered no apparant,lasting harm from this,he still screwed up his own life and had a negative effect on the lives of those around him.