• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

are LSD and psilocybin risky long term?

Widow

Esteemed member
Joined
May 17, 2026
Messages
47
Merits
559
I would say yes. A lot of evidence about the heart valve thing. I personally do not use or recommend these substances.
 
So your definition of "a lot of evidence" is a single study that concluded that we don't know if these substances cause heart health risks, and that further studies are necessary to reach a conclusion? :unsure:
 
So your definition of "a lot of evidence" is a single study that concluded that we don't know if these substances cause heart health risks, and that further studies are necessary to reach a conclusion? :unsure:
evidence is evidence.
 
The possibility is still real that these are unhealthy. It would be risky to use them repeatedly until further research is conducted.
 
1779392876845.png

You smoke tobacco, an activity that has decades of solid evidence proving it is extremely unhealthy and often leads to cancer and other diseases, yet you're worried about the health risks of microdosing a substance that has historically basically never been the direct cause of death by physiological damage? I mean, it's your choice what you do of course, it's just a bit odd that you're pointing a finger at these two substances in particular, which have a pretty clean track record in terms of toxicity and harm potential.
 
These substances weren't studied well until more recently which you are well aware of. You have no long term evidence just like me.
 
Sure, I don't, but linking a single study whose result is inconclusive is not proof that they are indeed harmful. It's good to be more careful in your choice of words when talking about this kind of stuff. If you would indeed say that they are harmful based on the study that you linked, you seriously need to reevaluate your approach towards the scientific method.
 
Regarding tobacco, those studies were on control groups that are vastly different than my daily lifestyle. I tend to void most "medical science" since changing many variables will likely lead to drastically different results.
 
I appreciate the feedback but I never claimed to have proof or that these substances are truly harmful.
 
That doesn't count as you saying they're harmful, considering the title of your thread?
it was an answer to the original question and title of the thread which clearly has "risky". How you define risky and harmful is up to you.
 
That's fine. Don't say you weren't warned before you get to the gates of hell.
 
Back
Top Bottom