>>34664324
Oh yes, you're talking a lot of sense. That fits perfectly with what I have been learning. Caveat: I have no background whatsoever in any medical field nor chemistry, these conclusions come from reading a lot, both at internet communities and actual academic studies and books (thank you, Sci-Hub and Libgen).

Direct physical damage to brain cells notwithstanding, things points towards there being two still badly-resolved ways drugs can cause mental damage. One is not knowing how to handle a bad trip. The drug itself didn't cause any actual harm, but rather the illusions the poor bastard witnessed created something in the same vein as PTSD. I know that likening bad trips to a disorder usually related with war and child abuse seems off, but some drugs can really bring the proverbial darkest parts of your soul to the fore. And the irony here is that this very thing is also responsible for life-changing positive experiences for many. A bad trip, properly handled, is very much a Dark Night of the Soul, the pain that necessarily precedes true catharsis. Improperly handled, it instead simply causes trauma. These would be the cases of people who developed anxiety, depression, PTSD and such. A wide variety of drugs can cause this damage independently of chemistry, because it's the subjective experience that's at fault. Altho the drugs' effects have wildly varying potential to do it. Psychedelics, of course, are much more likely to cause that than, say, sedatives.

The second type of mental drug-induced damage is biochemical in nature. This would be the infamous cases of drugs triggering schizophrenia in people who, it seems, wouldn't have otherwise developed it. The assumption here -- and let me point out it really is an assumption, as there's seemingly no hard data whatsoever on this, only anecdotes and conjecture -- is that this type of damage happens in people with a genetic predisposition towards psychosis-related disorders, of which schizophrenia is by far the most common. Thus, common wisdom is that people with a past history, or even family history, of such disorders should abstain from certain drugs -- altho microdosing seems to be universally safe, but then again, this is uncharted territory. Regardless, unlike the fist type of mental damage, this one seems to be remarkably, but not totally, restricted to classical psychedelics. Ye olde LSD, DMT, mescaline and such. The bulk of their action in the brain seems to be on serotonin receptors which happen to also be involved in psychotic disorders, which reinforces the aforementioned assumption regarding people at risk.

This brings up 3 important notes about the 2nd type of damage. One involves non-psychedelic drugs which can cause hallucinations, which, as far as my knowledge goes, all fall within the dissociative class. In the absence of serious research, reports are all we have, and so far, it seems that the classic substances of this class do not cause this biochemical damage. This would be explained by the fact that these classical, "pure" dissociatives don't interact with the seratonin receptors, and the hallucinations they cause are instead an indirect consequence of the dissociative effect, akin to hallucinations experienced with sensory deprivation. Some drugs, however, exhibit a curiously wide array of effects, which would include "impure" dissociatives which might hit the serotonin receptors, which is the second note I wanted to bring up. Some of these "wide-spectrum" drugs then, supposedly, can do biochemical damage to predisposed people. The third note is about old Mary Jane. Despite the occasional hallucination, it's not a classic psychedelic at all, and its rather in its own class, the ill-defined cannabinoids. The mystery here is that the substances responsible for cannabinoid effects seem, like other pure drugs of categories other than psychedelics, to leave the serotonin receptors well alone. Yet, weed seems to be the only non-psychedelic drug which causes the 2nd type of damage, the biochemical one.

This mystery would be explained -- again, lacking hard research -- by the fact that the vast majority of cannabinoids consumed are plant matter, and may contain a wide array of bioactive substances which have nothing to do with weed's classical effects. Impurities, so to speak, and these, I think, are the source of cases of biochemical damage stemming from weed use. They are a class of substances almost uncharted by science. Yes, even by drug standards. That's because we barely even knew they were there in the first place. Plants produce all manner of chemicals, some in vast amounts, some in mere traces. A few of them, however, beside being little in quantity, are also volatile, easily evaporating or degrading when exposed to air, light or whatever. These substances are loosely called volatile oils, and varying mixtures of them make up those essential oils you might see in perfume shops or such, which are mostly sold in tiny bottles of 10ml or less and have very thick, tho pleasant, smells, precisely because they easily dissipate into the air. Essential oils are an ancient invention, but it has always been extremely restricted to very few plants, which were whatever ones smelled good and could be extracted by whatever crude methods available. Only relatively recently have we learned that every plant produces them, and there's a preposterous amount of such substances, and it's astounding how little we know about them. The vast majority of them are virtually untouched by science beside having a name, and God only knows how many are yet to be discovered.

So there's a magical panoply of substances which have been hiding beneath our eyes forever, and may offer all sorts of uses. They are responsible for a lot of bioactive effects of plants reported in folk medicine, despite their tiny amounts. Academia produces a constant stream of this or that volatile oil being good against that or this disease, parasite or tumor, slowly accumulating hard knowledge, and so-called psychonauts add to this knowledge in their own way. Which is to say, yes, some of these volatile oils are very much psychotropic in several manners. Look up the chemical structures of myristicin and elemicin, the two most well known psychedelics among volatile oils and both present in nutmeg -- yes, the urban legend is not a legend -- and extremely concentrated in its essential oil, and compare with that of mescaline. They're verrrrry close, but not quite. With some special combinations and/or diets, you increase the odds of your body processing them into full-blown drugs. And according to caprices of fate, this can happen accidentally on occasion, and that's exactly what causes these psychedelic episodes from weed. The volatile oils hitch a ride in the dank nugz that you smoke. You know these terpenes that head shops sell? They're a subclass of volatile oils and probably the most common by volume. Some are much more common than others and arguably are felt every time. They're responsible for subtle variations between strains, both in aroma and psychoactive effects. Terpenes tend to be sedatives, which explains a lot about weed's classical effects, but again, there's a vast array of possible effects. And here, too, as far as I know, lies the answer to the mysterious risk of biochemical mental damage that weed may cause. Some of the volatile oils can interact with all sorts of receptors beside the cannabinoid ones, including the serotonin ones, and that's how the unfortunate pothead occasionally spazzes out for life. Volatile oils have never been accounted for when breeding strains of marijuana beyond the most obvious organoleptic effects, and since the goal is almost always to select the most potent specimens, weed is literally dank from extremely high concentrations of volatile oils, including a put-pourri of unknown substances which were artifically selected by accident. I presume that, in the near future, we will start seeing strains selected for volatile oil composition, which could include plants free of the psychosis-related trigger as well as others with guaranteed psychedelic trips.

Some interesting links. Information on essential oil psychonautics are spread in bits and pieces all over social networks, mostly those drug forums and amateur chemistry as well. The best collection of that data that I know of is in http://herbpedia.wikidot.com/ it's a priceless resource, don't forget to look up Oilahuasca. Composition of essential oils varies immensely not just with plant but with region, so if you want to get chase the fragrant dragon, look up the specific brand you're buying, because not all volatile oils are benign, not by a long shot. Sci-Hub and Libgen are great too, of course. This study in particular illustrates some of the theories above. It neatly compares the activity which various drugs effect on receptors. Most of them display different intensities of empathogenic and psychedelic effects, unfortunately few fall outside of that range. I'd like to direct your attention to the first supplemental data file, with neat graphs summarizing the activity of the receptor-drug combination, and specifically, at the last 3 graphs. These are the only ones for drugs with no empathogenic nor (direct) psychedelic effects, and suitably, they completely blank out on the serotonin receptors, represented by the leftmost bars with names beginning in 5ht (5-HT is a synonym for serotonin). All 3 are also what you might coloquially call pure drugs in their own class. Salvinorin A is a pure dissociative, morphine a pure sedative and THC, pure cannabinoid. It's a shame it doesn't include ketamine as well, which is also a pure dissociative and would, as far as I know, have only one bar, the last one, for NMDA, on full. The complete difference between its receptor activity and that of salvinorin A despite having a similar range of effects is still a mystery, although, arguably, salvinorin A is in a class of its own. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2814854/

I'll finish with some PSAs. First, considering this is all highly speculative, use this information at your peril. Always read and research a lot before putting anything into your body that isn't a big fat juicy cock. About the drugs that people at risk for psychotic disorders should avoid, the definite ones are weed and classical psychedelics, with dissociatives being an unknown quantity. Multiple-effect drugs -- these tend to be more recent -- which include psychedelic and/or dissociative effects are also a risk. Read. Since it's best to err on the side of caution, people at risk ought to avoid weed plus any drug with psychedelic or dissociative effects. None of the substances mentioned by name here save for morphine is physically addictive, but literally anything on Earth can be psychologically addicting, so know your limits. Two things to always consider: set and setting. Two mantras in case the trip sours: it's not real and it'll end soon. Read. Always try a low dose when doing a new substance. Even if it's supposed to cause the exact same effects as one with which you're familiar, there's always the risk of allergy. Try to have someone tripsit you whenever doing anything new. Different people have different sensitivities. Read. Essential oils are a mix of possibly dozens of different volatile oils, so you'll probably want to use some tek to separate the good stuff -- sedative oils tend to cut your psychedelic buzz. The best bets are the myristicin and elemicin present in nutmeg or elemi essential oils, look up 69ron's "Triple E tek" and read Herbpedia well. Meds and drugs can have dire (or, on occasion, positive) combinations, so research those too. On that note, remember booze is a drug too, you dumbass.

Lastly, advice specific to volatile oils. They're present in such minute amounts in plants probably for a good reason, as they're usually extremely bioactive. In the concentrated form -- that is, essential oils -- they can be a serious fucking danger. You might think it's just some toilet air freshener, but get that notion out of your head. Almost all products with some kind of volatile oil are extremely diluted, whereas essential oils are concentrated and thus can be hazardous. Don't treat them lightly just because they're routinely sold to soccer moms, because they're supposed to be merely smelled, or in some cases, applied on skin, and even then in highly diluted form, there are guidelines for safe concentrations which to apply, because they can be strong enough to be absorbed by the skin. Yes, it's possible to get a buzz by rubbing fruity oil on your hairy legs, believe it or not. But actual tripping will involve ingestion, and that's where you research a whole lot indeed. Even a benign substance (and volatile oils do have a lot of good health effects) can be dangerous in high amounts, and "high amounts" here is very relative. An ingested milliliter of one essential oil may give you a religious epiphany, the same amount of a different one can kill you, and no this is not hyperbole. Even when dosing correctly, keep in mind some volatile oils, like many substances present an inherent risk of carcinogenicity, abortions and whatever the fuck in "high" amounts. Most of them are harmless, but safety dictates that they're always assumed dangerous.