[deadbeeves]

However, what's unknown is whether people who develop schizophrenia due to psychedelic use wouldn't have developed it anyway for some other reason. Latent schizophrenia can be triggered by things such as stress.

Besides, it's not like even given this there's no way to consume the substances safely. A simple method is to way until 25-30 years of age. Since schizophrenia most commonly develops during a person's teenage years through to early adulthood, a person who hasn't developed it by 30 probably will never develop it.

[adnzzzzZ]

If you're prone to it (family with history of mental illnesses) you shouldn't use it no matter your age. Why risk it? Something like schizophrenia is no joke and ruins your life completely. And if you don't find meds that work for you you literally can't fix it and go back to normal.

[deadbeeves]

People do all sorts of dangerous things that don't seem to be worth it to others. The reason is really very simple: because it's fun. What's important is that it's each person's right to decide for themselves whether it's worth the risk, without having others force their decision onto them.

[mrcheesebreeze]

What matter is that we protect society.

Fun doesn't keep the nation together, we can't decide whats right or wrong just off of fun.

If you want to seriously harm yourself I believe we need to stop you.

That includes drug addictions, I think addicts need to be forcibly helped and not given more avenues to ruin their life.

I hate this "live and let live" type thinking with drugs because it enables people to ruin their lives.

I would rather be disliked but see people be healthy and their lives go well, than be liked for my opinion but enable people to ruin their lives.

addiction is no joke and consent to it doesn't make it right!

[deadbeeves]

I believe a society where one is not free to use one's body however they see fit is not worth living in, and not worth keeping together. It should be opposed and sabotaged at every turn, dismantled, and remembered as an example of how good intentions can create monsters.

>I hate this "live and let live" type thinking with drugs because it enables people to ruin their lives.

Yes, one of the consequences of self-determination is that you're able to make wrong choices. You know what doesn't make any wrong choices? Cattle. The farmer decides for his cattle what and when they eat, where they sleep, when they mate and who with, and when they die. It's completely impossible for a cow to make choices so wrong that it ruins its own life. Now, I personally don't find living like cattle to be very appealing, but perhaps you disagree.

[adnzzzzZ]

This is what your mentality creates by the way: https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/15682375482748641... At some point you have to be pragmatic and realize that some mental illnesses can't be fixed with more freedom. Some people need boundaries and structure in their lives or they'll make society worse for everyone. A responsible society provides said structure for those people who need it, and lets the ones who don't be free as you claim they should be.

[deadbeeves]

I'm not sure what you're pointing out in particular. The homelessness or the fighting? Homelessness is caused by poverty, not by drugs. People fight, with or without drugs. If you don't want to see people fighting in public places, you need a police force patrolling the streets that will actively break up fights, or you need a culture where people will intervene in fights they're not involved in and break them up. It would appear San Francisco has neither.

>At some point you have to be pragmatic and realize that some mental illnesses can't be fixed with more freedom.

I'm fine with a world with more than the absolute minimum number of mentally ill people. Put another way, there are things that are not worth sacrificing in order to have fewer mentally ill people.

>A responsible society provides said structure for those people who need it, and lets the ones who don't be free as you claim they should be.

Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the goal of a society is to organize efforts in order to accomplish tasks that would not be possible by individuals or smaller groups. "Providing structure to those who need it" seems more like the responsibility of a hospital, not of societies in general. While a society that works like a hospital (rather than merely containing them) is conceivable, I think asserting that one that doesn't is irresponsible is going too far.