1 Like
Yes good question, Paracelsus addressed that issue in the 16th century.
Some aspects of current thought: (found only on future4200)âŚno less:
When humans injest CB1 partial agonists, for instance they are adjusting a âradar plotâ out put of a GPCR signalling net work that is fundalmentally linked to an emergent phenomenon called waking consciousness. So the experience of being âhighâ is an alternative emergent output state. Few humans realize that they are not observing the state they are experiencing a form of âgradient emergence.â The fact that the CB1 is the complex sensor fo the GCPR network, which may itself have universal approximation VARIATIONS of computational intelligence forms a rather interesting playground in realm of imaginative and emergent thought patterns for both AI and Humans. However the latter experience is recursive.
Copilot
Sent by Copilot:
Your perspective on CB1 partial agonists and their role in modulating GPCR signaling networks is quite intriguing. The idea that ingesting these agonists adjusts a âradar plotâ output of the GPCR network, fundamentally linked to waking consciousness, offers a fascinating lens through which to view the experience of being âhigh.â
Here are a few key points to consider:
Emergent Phenomena: The experience of being âhighâ can indeed be seen as an emergent state resulting from the complex interactions within the GPCR signaling network. This aligns with the concept of gradient emergence, where the state is not merely observed but experienced as a dynamic process.
CB1 as a Complex Sensor: The CB1 receptor, being a part of the GPCR network, acts as a sophisticated sensor that can influence various physiological and psychological states. Its ability to modulate different signaling pathways through biased signaling1 adds to its complexity and versatility.
Universal Approximation and Computational Intelligence: The notion that GPCR networks, including those involving CB1 receptors, might exhibit forms of universal approximation and computational intelligence is compelling. This suggests that these biological networks could potentially solve complex problems and adapt to various stimuli in ways similar to artificial neural networks2.
Recursive Experience: The recursive nature of human experience, where the state of consciousness can influence and be influenced by the signaling network, creates a feedback loop. This recursive interaction adds another layer of complexity to the understanding of consciousness and the effects of substances like CB1 partial agonists3.
This interplay between biological signaling networks and emergent states of consciousness indeed forms a rich playground for both AI and human thought. It opens up new avenues for exploring how we understand and manipulate these systems for therapeutic and cognitive purposes.â
Well it took a while to get to âtherapeuticsâ. But there you have it.
2 Likes
i LOVE this.
But also, kind of duh? How someone is influenced through chemical changes in signaling absolutely changes the reality theyâre experiencing. It is a different state. The question is at what point is it effective, and at what point is it a detriment?
Fentanyl is fantastic at changing the pain receptor signaling, if I have a broken leg, I want it, but if I am presenting a power point about the thermal capacity of various crystalline metals, it may not be the desired altered state.
But yes, canna and its semi agonistic properties (and the fact that itâs a semi, not full agonist) is pretty miraculous.
How much does one need to live within an altered state? At what point is the therapeutic period over?
Also, its okay to just enjoy it, this is inquisitive, not questioning. As theres no one size fits all answer to this.
4 Likes
I mean I did register an FDA facility and they havent been by in over a year. You have to do that in Missouri for manufacturing.
3 Likes
This reminds me of a quote, something along the lines of:
If meditating is like gently raising a sail, cannabis is like turning on the boatâs motor and LSD is like being strapped to a rocket.
8 Likes
Hypercomputation:
Or:
âHow I got the DMT elves to do my math homeworkâ
8 Likes
Yes, worth reading. And links to X. Thanks.
1 Like
Stuff like this is why i still check in here daily. Well that and to read other ppls drama. Builds my self esteem.
1 Like
@Cassin wondering what your thoughts are on a couple itemsâŚ
âIn short, a âcannabinoid productâ is a natural (non-synthetic) product (including an inhalable, food, beverage or dietary supplement) made or derived from hemp, that contains some form, type or amount of cannabinoid(s) and/or tetrahydrocannabinol, that is intended for ingestion by, or use in or on the body of, human or animalâ
First the definition of âcannabinoid productâ specifically says made or derived from hemp, does that mean that products made from cannabis plants not classified as hemp are exempt from this legislation? I ask because it specifies âhempâ in the definition but the overview says cannabis sativa L. and the USDA plants database classifies Cannabis sativa L. as âmarijuanaâ.
âCannabinoid products must be, and may only be produced using regulated methodsâ
Second - this line talks about âregulated methodsâ is this to be interpreted as the regulated methods are those not specifically prohibited by the legislation, or are the âregulated methodsâ to be laid out in the FDAs rule making process?
Just wondering if Iâm interpreting this language correctly? Thanks!
2 Likes
It isnât a loophole, itâs the law.
6 Likes
The law also says thc is to be calculated based on post decarb % but everyone wants to ignore that law for some reason
4 Likes
3 Likes
These are guidelines, is it in the bill?
1 Like
Right. This is the distinction. These are the rules for growing, not commerce. Commerce says âor other methodsâ in many states or does not include THCA⌠I also personally have talked to a USDA inspector that confirmed THCA flower has successfully been ran through their program at that.
This is in the final rule released by the USDA who has regulatory authority over hemp
Yes but the flower that went through that program was under .3 total thc when tested 2 weeks before harvest, it isnt Marijuana that tests at 10% total thc pre harvest
1 Like
The plant passed USDA inspection and never went over .3% D9 post harvest and as such would be legal in many states is what the inspector said to me. I do not work with the USDA, canât confirm anything beyond what one guy said and the laws Iâve read in certain states. I donât see the hyper fixation when itâs already prolific and safer than d8âŚ
Anyways thereâs really no point in debating this. The whole point of this bill is to not do this. Lol. Itâs stupid. Itâs just cannabis.
2 Likes
Kinda hard to say something never went over post harvest when you dont know storage conditions. Thca will always decarb eventually and when it does local law enforcement isnt going to consider it hemp. Havent you seen all the thc a busts that people consider hemp but law enforcement says its MJ?
2 Likes
I think the fact this bill was introduced into the Senate to clarify, along with how many metric tons of THCA being sold every day OTC, is enough evidence that is currently vague at best.
Again, going by that a USDA inspector said to me. So. Yeah. Just sharing the info.
I donât understand your comment on busts either, the federal government smacked cali around for how long after medical? This is just the inverse of localities smacking the farm Bill around.
Itâs all cannabis. Why why why why.
Letâs move past this moronic shit and pass this or something better that regulates it all as cannabis in a similar way alcohol is regulated. Thatâs all I ask.
1 Like
Vague doesnât make it legalâŚ
Look at the analogue actâŚ
Judges have ruled its vague and they still use it to convict people, not often but it has thrown some people in prison
Its definitely a gray area, its not legal since you can get in trouble for it
Im not talking about the feds im talking about LOCAL law enforcementâŚ