I am curious how you could interpret that.
that
> It's a sobering and necessary counterpoint...
and that.
One thing that people didn't want to talk about with the cannabis legalization boom was how common paranoid schizophrenia is. My step-father has marijuana-induced paranoid schizophrenia, I have a few other friends also diagnosed with the same thing. For all the good that it has done for x demographics, it has damaged y demographics irreparably. A future of powerful and debilitating prescription drugs to treat their schizophrenia is what they have to look forward to now, they are objectively worse off for it and classified as legally disabled.
Nobody is hiding negative experiences. Again, you come across as wanting more badness than perhaps there actually is.
<A paragraph about personal knowledge of drug damage >
Yes, we know about this kind of thing . I personally know of alcohol deaths, permanent damage from amphetamines, addiction to cannabis, and second-hand reports of mental illness from cannabis abuse (note: abuse not use), anecdotal but reliable reports about mental damage from LSD. These conversations are happening.
You seem only receptive to the negative side of things.
people do. But just maybe 'negative' doesn't mean catastrophically bad, and just maybe bad experiences are in the minority hence the flood of positives. What your post comes across as, to me anyway, is that you want drugs to be a bad thing.
> but the "how" is largely ambiguous
Does it matter? Or are people just not allowed to have a positive thing happen from psychedelics?
You seem to be bringing a mindset to this discussion without apparently considering maybe drugs aren't always that bad. And you may be right, and you may be wrong, but you do seem determined to look on the darker side of things.