April in..... Cairngorms

It's that time of year again.....

It's Coming Out Day...

It is 73 years ago today that one of the most famous cycle rides ever undertaken by a human being took place. Famous to those into such things, at any rate. Our Great Cycling Hero worked for Sandoz, the pharmaceutical people, where he had landed the cushy-sounding number of running the ergot project. looking for something that might be useful, like a cure for migraine (hey, they still haven't found one. Anybody with faith in this pharma lark, take a quick reality check). He had been quietly synthesising new substances for eight years (definitely a cushy number). One day in April 1943, a curious whim overcame him. There was something he had synthesised back in 1938 that he felt an inexplicable urge to revisit. It was the 25th compound he had produced in the lysergic series: LSD-25.

He sampled a wee taster on Friday 16th, enough to confirm that it was indeed (horror of horrors) psychoactive. So, on Monday April 19th, 1943, at 4.20 in the afternoon, he took what he believed to be a larger yet still apparently miniscule amount of this new substance. For thirty minutes he noticed no effect. Soon afterwards, however, he was plunged into a state where he was unable to write, so got on his bike to go home. He pedalled off into, as Jay Stevens puts it in his admirable 'Storming Heaven', 'a suddenly anarchic universe.' To quote Stevens once more:'... this wasn't the familiar boulevard that led home, but a street painted by Salvador Dali, a funhouse roller coaster where the buildings yawned and rippled. But what was even stranger was the sense that although his legs were pumping steadily, he wasn't getting anywhere.'

Our Great Hero is one Albert Hofmann. And the rest, as they say, is history. But the day is being commemorated by the Psychedelic Society as 'Coming Out Day'. Psychedelics are a natural element in the history of humankind. Let's speak about them, and the benefits they have conferred personally. So here we go.

I have written elsewhere a little about my own psychedelic history in the 1970s. It formed a turning point in my life, if only to demonstrate clearly the path I was destined already to take. I spent a good 25 years afterwards free from entheogenic materials while I did my level best to practice mindfulness, love, and freedom within the context of organised Buddhism.

It was around 12 years ago that I first revisited psychedelics as a potential aid in following my hopefully spiritual path through life. It was during those short purple years when special mushrooms could be bought openly in Camden Market, London, and elsewhere. I was not overly impressed with the results, an impression that most likely says more about me at the time than the mushrooms. Over the following years, I experimented very occasionally with various other shamanic-type plants: cactus, salvia divinorum, yopo, and ayahuasca. In general, I found these excursions beneficial; not in the dramatically life-changing ways of my youth, maybe. But highly worthwhile nevertheless: for providing a kick when I needed it, for opening doors in the shell of selfhood, and helping me confront what required confronting.

Interestingly, while the plants had some advantages over the synthetic psychedelics, nothing seemed to compare with good old LSD-25 in terms of being a substance of pure consciousness. I retained a curiosity, maybe simply a nostalgia. Then something turned up which, I wondered, might provide an answer. It is the subject of my particular 'coming out' tale for today.

Two years ago, I was not in a very good way. The place I had been working closed its doors, an event which I didn't cry about too much. Nevertheless. My diary of the period captures things pretty well: 'As I walked away from my work, I had the distinct feeling that I was heading into a new and different phase of my life. But what was being ushered in, I had no idea......  It could have been a period of great mountain adventures, fantastic meditation voyages. But it wasn't. Instead, I was beset by energy problems, anxiety. My toes and feet sometimes felt as if energy, sensation, was being pulled out of them........ Something had to give, as I felt more and more stretched psychically......' (It is worth mentioning that my wife had recently undergone surgery for a potentially serious condition, which undoubtedly didn't help).

Around this time my attention was drawn to the fact that two apparently LSD-like substances were out there for simple, above-board purchase: Al-Lad and LSZ. I made the decision to buy some of the latter (Al-Lad appeared to be in short supply at that moment) and to give it a go. As I wrote in aforementioned diary: 'I needed something to assist me to bottom out.'

In short, I was not over-impressed with LSZ on that cold, bright April Saturday in 2014. Its resemblance to LSD seemed pretty, well, limited. One thing was that I felt as though I had consumed a very foreign substance, while LSD always seemed to be welcomed and recognised as a friend by my mind and body. Rather than chilling out, I found myself pacing restlessly around - undoubtedly an amplification of my state of mind at the time. Several hours later, with the peak of the trip gone, I took a walk in the forest nearby. Nature invariably revives ones sense of reality. Back to the diary; 'I sat on the stump of a tree trunk and allowed myself to sink deeper into myself. As I did so, I also allowed myself to utter three words that I found it so hard to say: I need help. I repeated them, louder, telling the trees. I need help. This was a relief and a release. Tears welled up as I began to walk through the early evening. It was a bit of a breakthrough.'

Breakthrough indeed. Me? Self-sufficient, self-reliant, independent, shit-hot king of the castle me......need........ help? Surely not. There remained the question of what kind of help exactly was in order. As pressing as my current state of mind were the chronic migraines and sinus problems that had plagued me for years, and were showing no sign of going away. They seemed, in truth, to be intimately related to the energy, anxiety blah blah blah. I had by now given up on conventional medicine as providing anything effective as a real remedy, having tried and failed umpteen times with prescription substances, some of which seemed far more hazardous than LSZ.

I began to see a homeopath. Fortunately, my choice was a wise one. Between the LSZ trip and my initial homeopathy appointment I succeeded in making things worse by pulling some muscles in my back. I arrived at the therapy centre with a streaming cold and hardly able to get up the stairs to the consulting room. More tears, as I relived my deepest nightmares of being out of control. To cut a long story short, the homeopathy was great: a year on, I was far more able to manage my conditions, which continue to appear from time-to-time, but less seriously.

LSZ wasn't a great substance. It felt very synthetic, and came with what those in-the-know call heavy bodyload. That is to say, it made me feel nauseous and weak, for a good 24 hours after swallowing the blotter. Nevertheless, I have to thank LSZ from the bottom of my heart for initiating a process of recovery in my life which may or may not have happened otherwise. Sometimes it is the aftermath, the practical ramifications, that are most significant, rather than the trip day itself.

It wasn't long before Teresa May was on the case, deciding that psychological breakthroughs are not in the national interest, and LSZ went the way of most psychedelics. It was replaced by 1P-LSD, the new kid on the block, a far friendlier substance, and one which does seem to act like a stripped-down version of LSD itself. It's still around.

So there we have it. My contribution to Psychedelic Coming Out Day. May we all walk our paths through life, discovering its sacred dimensions as we go, with or without the help of psychedelic substances. But let that choice be a free and open matter for the individual.





    

    

      

Shock and Horror in the Vortex

Just a note to say that I have removed the 'Great Places on the Web' list from the blog. This is because some of those Great Places aren't really active any longer. Some other of those Great Places have become a bit less Great in recent times. Probably most importantly, there are loads and loads of Great Places on the web nowadays, and to pick a small number out of the hat is a bit silly. Most people can find stuff themselves easily enough on the internet if they want to, anyway. The blog page looks a bit more spacious now....
 

I Love Creag Bheag!

Creag Bheag: the name says it all, really. The little rock;  the little crag. Though this fails to explain why Aonach Beag, the little Aonach, adjacent to Ben Nevis, is bigger and higher than its neighbour Aonach Mhor, the big Aonach.

I have a fantasy, or a way to put things. One spring morning, the fantasy goes, I shall awake in my bed to the sound of a loud voice. 'No more of that big mountain stuff' it thunders. 'It's walks in the park from now on for you.'

This voice of fate may or may never turn up. Whichever way, even without the body beginning to fall apart, there is a place for the little hill, the little rock - the little mountain, even, if we can be allowed to speak of such a thing. It's the time of year when big mountains are off the menu. It's the short days of November through to February's end. It's those days when the weather on the high tops is inclement or downright dangerous. It's those 'not too much energy today' days, those 'can't be bothered' days. Those days when, even with perfect fair weather and a long summer's day ahead, you just fancy a little hill, a little  mountain. I hope that, when camping epics to remote hills are simply memories, I shall still be able to visit, climb, savour, Creag Bheag.

Photos: Creag Bheag this February  

What about the Children?

OK Mr Smart-Arse Pale Green Vortex Man. You've really done it now. Overstepped the limit. I mean, ridiculing those decent, well-intentioned people with their Psychoactives Bill. I ask, how heartless can you be? Isn't it about the children? Don't we need to protect the children?

Well, it's true that our young people do sometimes need to be protected. Under normal circumstances, we have things called laws specifically designed for purpose. You know, age-related. They exist for a range of topics where it's best that young people are specially considered. Alcohol, sex, tobacco, driving cars, for example. 'Drugs', though, that awful word in our weird society, are to be treated differently. We shall prevent young people making mistakes with psychoactives by criminalising psychoactives. It's the same logic as banning motor vehicles because a small number of under-age people drive around and come to no good. Or criminalising sex as a result of some under-agers getting it on.

There is a very sneaky, disingenuous aspect to the publicity driving the Psychoactive Substances Bill. A deliberate misleading of the public - at least that section of the public that doesn't check up on things for themselves. 'Legal highs' are demonised through the use of statistics purportedly showing many folk - especially young folk - dropping dead as a result of taking them. The figure of 97 for 2012 has been frequently bandied around. The thing is this, though - it does not actually refer to 'legal highs' at all. It refers to NPS, New/Novel Psychoactive Substances. NPS is a far wider designation, including many substances that are pretty new kids on the block, but that have nevertheless already been banned. The deliberate conflation of the two terms is intended to mislead, and is shameful but true. Thus, of those 97 fatalities in 2012, 23 were the result of PMA/PMMA, a 'false ecstasy' illegal since the 1970s. Another 37 concerned mephedrone and similar (discussed in the early days of PGV in 'Plant food, anyone?'), which was banned in 2012. Though NPS, these were all already 'illegal highs' so not at all relevant in consideration of the new Bill. How many people actually died as a result of properly legal highs? According to Professor David Nutt, probably somewhere between ten and zero.

It should be borne constantly in mind that the main effrontery of the Psychoactive Substances Bill is that it is an attack on consciousness; as Casey Hardison reminded us years ago, the 'War on Drugs' is not a war on drugs, but a war on consciousness. This Bill is the logical conclusion of that way of thinking. 'We have decided, and decided precisely, what states of mind you are permitted, and which ones you are not.' It is Orwellian in a way that none of the dark characters inhabiting the pages of 1984 could have dreamt up. In the same way that you don't need to be homosexual to support gay rights, or don't have to be a female to understand equal pay for women, you do not need to be a consumer of any psychoactive substances, legal or illegal, to realise the totalitarian nature of this piece of (hopefully unworkeable) legislation, and to object to it as a full-frontal attack on the most basic of human freedoms.

In truth, this Bill has been promoted largely by a group of hardcore ideologues, who have the nerve to think they can decide what other adult people do with their private lives. I do not like this 'left-wing, right-wing' designation of people; having said that, our psychoactive totalitarians are often embodiments of all that is despicable about 'right-wing' mentality. They have their own very precise view of how people should live, behave, think, feel, 'mentalise'. At weekends, they would have all the young people doing embroidery (the girls) or practicing reef knots (the boys). The older people will bake cakes (the women) or build garden sheds (the men). In the evening, they will all sit down together in front of the television for Jonathan Ross and Masterchef. If you want to do this with your life, go ahead. But let others get on with their lives as well.

As for they children, well they do sometimes need a helping hand. 'Education' is a word bandied about by the anti-psychoactives people; and education does indeed sometimes come in useful. Not, however, the 'education' proposed by these people, which is really propaganda in disguise. Going around schools preaching about the evils of drugs will indeed cause panic in the A and E departments across the country, as millions of young people need urgent treatment for a surfeit of laughter. Drug education needs to come from people who have 'been there' and can distinguish between more positive and more destructive ways to go. But hey, they can't easily do that, because the legal regime makes that problematic. Back to square one......

Plenty of decent stuff has appeared in recent days on this topic. Here's one.....

anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2016/03/the-psychoactive-substances-bill-is.html

And don't forget the two cardinal principles of drug prohibition:

1. The more draconian the measures, the more control is passed to the truly criminal underworld, to the people who are properly unscrupulous.

2. The more draconian the measures, the more unpredictable, the more varied in purity, the substances being offered to and purchased by people young and old. And, as a result, the greater the risk and number of casualties. As mentioned before on this blog, there is blood on the hands of the Home Office, the Home Secretary, and everybody else behind this ridiculous and dangerous drug regime.

Image: law-abiding citizens. From the Guardian.




 

'Salty Death' legal high warning

www.psychedelicsociety.org.uk/salty-death

Don't say you haven't been told.........

Psychoactives, Anyone?

"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two main enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about drugs? Of course we did."
                       1994 quote from former Nixon policy advisor John Ehrlichman, quoted by Dan Baum at Harper's.

OK, so that's it. One of the roots of the 'War on Drugs' is a lie told by people who knew they were lying. Not actually surprising. But just consider how many people's lives have been messed up as a result of that lie. The deliberate telling of massive porkies to an increasingly unconvinced public reaches its apotheosis on the other side of the Atlantic with the 'Psychoactive Substances Bill' navigated in by Mrs Pork Pie herself, Teresa May. Actually the implementation of the Bill, originally scheduled for April 6th, has been delayed (for how long, nobody seems to know), as I suppose that someone's woken up to the fact that it may well be quite a difficult stunt to pull off, unless all the escape routes are anticipated and plugged up. And, believe me, there sure is a bucketload of 'em....

In the meantime, here is a pic of our Great Leader on holiday with his goodly wife. They are seen happily imbibing, er, a psychoactive substance. For those with little knowledge of psychoactives, I shall explain that they are ingesting a beer, or lager, possibly called a cerveza where they are in the photo. This beverage contains, in relatively mild form, a psychoactive substance called alcohol. This drug is taken all round the world, very often in the company of friends, or at special alcohol parties or alcohol clubs. It is also taken alone, or at home.

Many people are able to take this drug pretty regularly without experiencing obvious serious problems. There are, however, enormous numbers of users whose lives are deleteriously affected or completely destroyed as a result of doing this drug. It can lead to uncontrollable mood swings, in many people increasing their tendencies towards violence. They may attack strangers for no apparent reason whatever, without any memory of the event afterwards. Consumption of this drug leads to great overloading of emergency services at hospitals, particularly during weekends and at holiday times. Alcohol is highly addictive for some people, destroying their careers, marriages, and everything else as a result. The physical health of many people is seriously affected by this drug. In particular, many premature deaths occur as a result of irreparable damage to the liver.

Now onto another psychoactive, or group of psychoactives. Psychedelic-type substances, by definition, will all be criminalised in this new wonder-law laid out by our Great Leader and  his Henchwoman-in--Chief, Ms May. Over the past 55 years, one or more of these psychedelic-type substances has been implicated in the following: drastic reductions in reoffending by serious criminals; assisting people to overcome post-traumatic stress; helping people to shed addiction to properly harmful substances such as alcohol and heroin; alleviating or preventing cluster headaches and migraines; speeding up a variety of psychotherapeutic processes; reducing stress and anxiety in terminally-ill patients. Not to mention the spiritual benefits and life-affirming experiences testified to by thousands of respectful and generally law-abiding people. These are just a few that come to mind, all evidence-based, built upon the careful and responsible use of these psychedelic-type substances.

Fortunately, there will be exemptions from the Bill. Not for psychedelics, but for alcohol, so our Great Leader and others of his ilk can continue to go on jolly holidays and get merry. As for our psychedelics, not enough research has been carried out to prove that they have therapeutic or medical value. Thus speak the Wise Ones. And why hasn't more research been carried out? - well, er, because the substances are illegal.

The great thing about the Psychoactive Substances Bill is that it is so patently ludicrous that it shows to all but the walking dead the true nature of our governemnts and their laws. They are not for our benefit, but to exert control over what the rest of us plebs do, don't do, think, feel, etc. In fact, finally unable to defend the indefensible, they have in recent years given up on the 'health of the populace' line for drug laws, instead resorting to some vague notions about 'historical and cultural factors'. Maybe I have been unfair; maybe we should take this element into consideration. Historical and cultural factors. OK. But we'll need to do a bit more tweaking to do it properly. Firstly, we shall need to deport all Muslims from the UK, since they fit in to the scheme neither historically nor culturally. This is, after all, historically and culturally a Christian country. Then we'll have to get rid of all those same-sex relationships, which are neither historical nor cultural. And what about women enjoying the privilege of voting? How far are we going back in our historic and cultural considerations?

So absolutely barmy is this Bill that it might show how desperate the Dark Controllers have become. Extreme situations lead to extreme measures, extreme 'solutions'. We can only hope that this is the case. Are Dave and Sam having a drink in the last chance saloon?