Browse By

Reflections on Salvia Divinorum, Danger, Morality and Prudishness

It’s been a couple of days since I took the recommended dose of salvia divinorum (2 inhalations of salvia smoke, ten times) and recorded the results for a podcast (part 1 | part 2). I’ve been thinking about it in the back of my mind since, and have just a few reflections upon it that I’d like to share.

Salvia divinorum is clearly not absolutely safe. If I had taken the salvia in a highly public place, I could have been taken advantage of. If I had tried to drive, I would have wrecked the car. If I hadn’t been marking off the hits I’d taken as I went, I could have taken too much and gone a bit around the bend. You could say exactly the same things about alcohol.

The effects of salvia divinorum I felt were mood enhancement, distraction, and sensory distortion (some added sense of depth, a feeling of lift, some sense of immobility, and interesting colors appearing around the edges of objects). You could say exactly the same things about alcohol — except for the sensory distortion. So if you wanted to slip on a virtual reality helmet (or play video games) and drink a few Coronas, you’d be in a similar (if not the same) state.

There is not a big moral movement against people drinking a few Coronas and using virtual reality helmets or playing video games. There is a big moral movement against people taking hallucinogens. Why? With regard to consistency, I have no clue. Tossing considerations of consistency aside, I — no, I still have no clue. It might be that people in this country have a problem with other people messing and tinkering with their perceptions of the world around them. But, then, why no problem with virtual reality helmets? It might be that people in this country have problems with departures from the empirical reality we commonly perceive, to an experience in which what one person sees as real is not what the rest of us see as real. But, then, why were so many people willing to swallow Bush’s patent malarkey? Why do so many Americans participate in organized religion?

When it comes down to it, I don’t understand what the big deal is about someone smoking a bit of (legal) weed. I can’t fit it into any part of the American moral sensibility, except that part promoted by the Puritans and the Prudes: Joy is bad. Fun is bad. Glee is bad. Exploration is bad. You are a bad dog. So slap that glum face back on and get to work, because The Lord is watching.

Is that it? Are we just a nation of hopelessly constipated Prudes?

Or am I unable to see the obvious reason why such experiences are a Bad Thing, to be avoided or, if engaged in, to be whispered about in shame? If so, help me out. Explain to me why I am such a Bad Dog.

41 thoughts on “Reflections on Salvia Divinorum, Danger, Morality and Prudishness”

  1. Iroquois Honky says:

    Oh, no Jim, we WANT you to be our Bad Boy. You can take all the risks and tell us all about it. Other people might be afraid to risk their health, their marriage, their career and their children, but not you. You’re not afraid of anything.

    Have you picked up any pulp romance novels lately? They all have the same basic plot. First the heroine meets the Bad Boy. No American woman can resist a Bad Boy, including me, but we all know what happens when you get involved with one. It ruins your life, that’s what. But in fiction that doesn’t happen. The Bad Boy is discovered to have Socially Redeeming Qualities and the heroine lives happily ever after.

    Do you know who the most popular person at a party is? The alcoholic. Alkies are gregarious, they get around and know all kinds of juicy, gossipy stuff and they are desperate to please strangers and make a good impression on people they don’t know. But meet them at an AA meeting and they’re terribly depressing. They forget all the joy/fun/glee/exploration stuff and say stuff like “My name is Bill and my last drink was nine years ago…” or something like “Since I quit drinking, the doors to heaven have not opened, but the doors to hell have closed.”

    The Al-Anons and the Adult Children Of Alcoholics are even worse, working on all their stupid Dysfunctional Codependency Recovery Issues like Self Esteem, Identity, Intimacy, Trust, Becoming Your Own Parent, and the balance between Chaos and Control. What a bunch of constipated, consistency, prudish, puritan losers. Don’t they want someone else to have joy/fun/glee/exploration stuff? Do they actually expect to have a life themselves?

    You see Jim, you’re not a real person. You’re a virtual reality blogosphere person. If we want to hear dismal, constipating, reality-based stuff we can always go to an AA meeting. When we tune in to this station we want to see you do the joy/fun/glee/exploration thing and let someone else pay the price. We want to think we can have the Ride Of Our Lives without falling off.

  2. Jim says:

    I was waiting for our resident prude. Thanks for the classic delivery.

    So tell me exactly how my health, my marriage, my career, and my children were harmed by trying salvia divinorum for an hour.

    Or give it a rest.

  3. Iroquois Honky says:

    “I was waiting for our resident prude.”

    Sorry, didn’t mean to butt in. I’ll be quiet and wait too.

    Of course you’re not going to get hurt. You’re young, you’re teflon, you’re bullet-proof.

  4. HareTrinity says:

    Excuse me, Iroq?

    MILLIONS of people at least try drugs in their life time with no bad side effects.

    Fact is, drugs, excluding alcohol and nicotine, were mass-banned after WW2 for NO REAL REASON.

    Leaving them illegal gives an awful lot of power to some people who really are nasty pieces of work, and the government has trouble giving out REAL advice on how to take them safely on the grounds that you’re not legally allowed to take them at all.

    “Drugs are bad” will work fine until people realise that’s a load of bull. Where do the lies stop? Well, a lot of those people find out where drugs go from better-than-booze to life-wreckers.

    Banning poisons I can understand. Banning the use of drugs in public and whilst driving, I can understand. Banning drugs for being drugs? It doesn’t make sense.

    Unjust laws get broken. A big majority of crimes in the UK are drug-related.

  5. Jim says:

    Don’t go shitting all over this comments section with accusations if you aren’t prepared to justify yourself.

    So tell me exactly how my health, my marriage, my career, and my children were harmed by trying salvia divinorum for an hour.

    Or give it a rest.

  6. Iroquois Honky says:

    Where do you find statistics for how many people try drugs and how many have “side effects”? Who has determined this and how was it determined?

    You sound upset. You are ususally the first person to play skeptic over any issue, but this time you have dropped the torch and I have picked it up.

    What harm? My church provides space for AA, Al-Anon, Families Anonymous, Cocaine Anonymous, and Narcotics Anonymous. Multiply that by all the churches and social service agencies and you have an unknown but significant number of people who believe their lives have been harmed by their own or someone elses alcohol or substance use. Whether they started with one hour of curiosity I cant say. It happened somehow.

    I have also been personally involved with Bad Boys who developed self-destructive lifestyles and did not live to see their 40th birthdays. They were both educated, sharp, and curious, and I did not see it coming for either one of them. I like you very much, Jim, and I hope you do see your 40th birthday. I do not use recreational drugs, but I do drink on rare occasions. I found your description interesting, but do not plan to try salvia myself.

    What you wish to do is your decision completely. If you do not wish to discuss it further, I am happy to drop the subject.

  7. Jim says:


    I am not upset. A better word is stupefied. I am stupefied by your lack of empirical support for the issue. Salvia Divinorum is not a narcotic. It is not addictive. So your point is… what????

    Your position is a fear-based one. I could say the same thing about car drivers. Do you drive a car? If so, do you plan to stop? I would like you to make your fear-based assertion an empirically-based one. Tell me exactly how my health, my marriage, my career, and my children were harmed by trying salvia divinorum for an hour.

    Support your claim empirically, or own your own fear as your own, and for the rest of us give it a rest.

  8. Iroquois Honky says:

    So you demand empirical support. (Why so defensive?) Here’s what you do. Go straight to the horse’s mouth. In any city in America you can pick up the phone, dial 411, ask for Alcoholics Anonymous, and probably go to a meeting the same day. When the volunteer answers the phone, ask for the location of an ‘open’ meeting. Sit through the meeting and start talking to whoever will anwswer your questions. Ask them what they use besides alcohol–some will have multiple addictions. Ask them if someone can have a problem without taking a narcotic. And ask them what happened to their health, their marriages, their careers, and their children. Do not come back here and tell me what they said, because I don’t care.

    Addictions counseling is a specialized field and one which I have no patience whatsoever for anymore, if I ever did, but they will have infinate patience to talk to you, because that is what AA is all about.

    I am so done here.

  9. HareTrinity says:

    You became an alcoholic too? Which article was that?

  10. Jim says:

    You ARE done here, Iroquois Honky.

    I’m not being defensive. I’m asking you to stop playing Drama Queen and back up your claims with actual facts.

    You are unable to do so.

    You are done.

  11. Iroquois Honky says:

    In this state, every advertisement for a casino is also required to give the phone number of the gambling addiction hotline.

    If my eyewitness account and the existence of dozens of twelve step programs in every city does not convince you of the seriousness of addictions problems, I don’t know what you would consider to be an “actual fact”.

    But consider this: some people are going to read your account and decide to try salvia or some other recreational drug. Of those people, some may continue down a road that leads to broken homes and miserable lives. Instead of mocking twelve-step programs, you should be providing information about them as a public service.

  12. Jim says:

    Your comments are a perfect indication of the position of the Prude.

    Rather than grant individual people their autonomy, their free will and their responsibility, you want to tell other people what they can and cannot do. You are playing nanny.

    Now, if there were an empirically demonstrable risk, that would be one thing.

    But you either CANNOT or WILL NOT demonstrate one. You just SAY there is one.

    You are playing the classic lumping game, using multiple steps of really, really bad logic.

    Ex. If some people have ruined their lives because of addictions to alcohol, and if alcohol is addictive, and if alcohol is a drug, then anybody who uses a drug is at significant risk of ruining their life.

    How many logical missteps can you find in the previous paragraph, Iroquois Honky? There are more than a handful.

    Let me help with a gimme: the biggest problem with your assertions is that you’re lumping together all drugs as if the dangers of one are the dangers of another, because they are “drugs.” Well, guess what. Aspirin is a drug. Ibuprofen is a drug. Why aren’t you ranting about people taking aspirin and ibuprofen ruining their lives? I mean, golly gee whizzikers, there are people who take aspirin and then go on to become alcoholics! Golleee.

    Consider this: some people are going to read your sanctimonious, fact-deprived rant and decide that you are so full of bullshit that they need a drink. And then they’re going to become alcoholics. Instead of peddling unsupported empirical claims, you should be PROVIDING INFORMATION TO BACK UP YOUR CLAIMS.

    I would consider to be an “actual fact” something that BACKED UP YOUR CLAIMS.

    YOU CLAIMED that my health, my marriage, my career, and my children were harmed by trying salvia divinorum for an hour.

    Back it up. Back it up. Back it up. Or retract your claim.

    It’s that simple.

  13. Mike says:

    This discussion would be far more interesting if the participants understood that the disease of addiction is non-specific to any particular drug; but is just that, a disease that affects 1 out of 10 Americans, and appears to show itself in children of chemically dependent parents at a much higher rate than non-chemically dependent parents (37% if one parent is C/D, 96% if both) even if the child is adopted out to non-chemically dependent parents at birth. this seems to indicate that there is a genetic predisposition to chemical dependency disease. There are, indeed, psychological and sociological factors to be considered, but the same psychosocial pressures also occur in other children, and they never seem to develop full-blown chemical dependency. I teach this class regularly in our local DUI school, and provide counseling for those who show symptoms. Jim, I’m not attacking anyone, but I feel it my duty as a counselor, to provide the participants of this love-fest with a little badly-needed information. Oh, IH? I am also a member of Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous and I, too, become annoyed at the sniveling that goes on at AA and NA meetings. But I still go to them. Why, you ask? Because I prefer living in this 3-bedroom house that I bought and paid for with my own money, with my wife and son, who are, indeed, grateful to have a Clean&Sober husband and father, and work in a job that might be doing Society some good, rather than being homeless, jobless, and penniless, like I was 20 years ago. So, in conclusion, IH, if you don’t know what you’re talking about, shut up.
    My, I seem to have grown a resentment…

  14. Iroquois Honky says:

    Read again what I wrote. I said you were not afraid of any risks. And I assured you there were no risks to you whatsoever. Why then the rant? The first sign of an addiction problem is defensiveness. Hmmmm…

    Terrible isn’t it, the nasty things people say about aspirin without backing up their claims. Like the sanctimonious, fact-deprived National institute of Neurological Disorders, the sanctimonious, fact-deprived National Reye’s Syndrome Foundation, and the sanctimonious, fact-deprived Food and Drug Administration. In fact, my brother’s wife is so sanctimonious and fact-deprived that she gave her infants tylenol in stead of aspirin in spite of the lack of empirically demonstrable risk of Reye’s Syndrome. I can assure you I take aspirin every day without incurring any risk of prolonged vomiting or unconsciousness. I’m sure, Jim that you will not be so sanctimonious and fact deprived as to withhold aspirin from your own little ones. You will not be a Prude or a Sissy.

  15. Jim says:

    You were being sarcastic, IH, and you know it. The alternative is that you are really stupid, and I don’t think that’s true.

  16. Iroquois Honky says:

    Of course I was being sarcastic, Jim, perceptive of you as usual, and thank you for the compliment. My remarks about twelve-step meetings were likewise half sarcastic–I attended one several years ago as part of a class assignment and found it depressing, in a good part becasue of my own personal experiences and the real-life tragedies I saw being played out in the lives of the participants.

    Thank you for the reality check, Mike. One of the studies of alcoholism I read about was a study of identical twins separated at birth, which, of course, revealed the genetic link for alcoholism. The flip side of this study is though identical twins were much more likely to be alcoholic if their twin was alcoholic, NOT ALL of the twins were alcoholic if their twin was. This shows it is possible to beat a chemically dependent genetic code. Forgive my lack of patience with the 12-step scene, Mike; that’s just the way I am. I understand they are life-saving programs. Keep going back. It works.

  17. Jim says:

    So, now that you’ve admitted you were being sarcastic, and so that you really did indicate that my health, my marriage, my career, and my children were harmed by trying salvia divinorum for an hour…

    … back it up, or retract your claim.

    No, I will not back off on this. You’re peddling fear without substantiation and I will not have it.

  18. Iroquois Honky says:

    So now that I’ve told you tongue-in-cheek there are no risks, you want me to tell you again there are no risks, only this time it’s not tongue-in-cheek?

    It is what it is, Jim. Saying there is no risk will not make it so.

    How well did you research this stuff before you tried it? Does the FDA approve it? Your position seems to be salvia is perfectly safe except for the impairment part. How do you know it won’t cause birth defects like thalidimide? Or chromosome damage like LSD? Or what was that thing that paraquat caused? Some rare kind of lung lesions? What about aspirin and the Reye’s syndrome thing? People sure thought aspirin was safe. And you didn’t seem to get the thing about addictions, either–how chemical dependency threatens the ability to be a husband and father and to work.

    You don’t seem to have any problem accepting the joy/fun/glee/exploration part of the equation. Maybe you should accept the fear part too.

  19. HareTrinity says:

    I’m not surprised the twin studies showed such results. A lot of things are at least partially dependant on genes.

    So ban drugs?

    Schizophrenia, depression and anorexia nervosa also have similar signs with twin studies.

    Did you want to make it illegal to not eat? Illegal to go through a crisis?

    The way to tackle problems like addictions is not to act like EVERYONE is likely to get them (everyone runs a risk, we all risk losing our lives whenever we cross a road). Everyone is not likely to get them, everyone is relatively unlikely to get them, but significantly high enough for it to be of concern.

    Regulation, support and information is called for. Blanket banning and backing it up with lies just makes you untrustworthy.

    Let people know the signs of addiction, and the places they can go if they do have them, and it’ll be easier than making them a scapegoat of society and expecting them to seek help when they don’t want to be seen.

  20. HareTrinity says:

    “Everyone is not likely to get them, everyone is relatively unlikely to get them, but significantly high enough for it to be of concern.”
    To clarify; the risk is there and pretty significant, but to go on Mike’s statistics of 1 out of 10; we are 10 times more likely not to be at risk.

  21. Reardon says:

    Oh, on the contrary.

    I think the best way to fight addiction is by heaping disdain on anyone who does anything to which anyone else might ever become addicted.

    Of course, people can become addicted to just about anything–drugs, gambling, religion, shopping, sex, video games, you name it. The risk of addiction is too great for us to ever tolerate any of these things.

    We need to start accosting people who do these things and say: “You bought something at the store? You irresponsible bastard! Other people are going to see you do that or hear about it and figure it’s OK for them to do it too. And a certain number of those people are going to become addicts and it will ruin their lives. It’s all your fault!”

  22. Iroquois Honky says:


    AA and similar 12-step programs remain the most successful “treatment” for alcoholism and other chemical dependencies. The AA view is that only the individual involved can determine whether they are, themselves, in fact alcoholic. Those who identify themselves as addicted often spend every evening of their lives in meetings just to stay clean and sober for one day. Often they have lost everything–health, home, job, marriage, money, friends, family–before getting to that point.

    By the time they stop to try to figure out how their lives went down the toilet, they can be in the position of trying to develop insight and coping skills while having very few brain cells left. Wouldn’t it be nice if that insight could happen before the search for cheap thrills?

    The game of heaping distain is one often played by addicts who desperately want to continue their addiction. Some of them can get very good at painting themselves as the victim. Look at the above posts and watch Jim pull out all the emotional stops against anyone who doesn’t wish to join his experiment. If you don’t use halluciogens you are “puritan, a drama queen, hopelessly constipated, prudish, inconsistent, santimonious, fact-deprived, anti-joy, anti-fun, anti-glee, anti-exploration, glum,” and you are suddenly part of a “Big Moral Movement”, and oh yes, religion is in there somewhere too, just lurking. Oh, oh, yes, and you’re also depriving them of their automony, telling them what they can do, and playing nanny.

    That’s some pretty heavy peer pressure for using drugs. And that’s just if you express interest but don’t plan to try it yourself. I surely don’t see any acceptance here of my position that I’m interested in hearing about it, but not interested in trying it myself. Jim wants everyone to be just like him.

    Someone on a different thread asked Jim if he would do anything differently in hindsight, but that question seems to have gotten dropped in favor of a lot of defensive rhetoric.

  23. Jim says:


    I’m not calling you a drama queen because you have what seems to be a blanket anti-drug stance, extending even to aspirin.

    I’m calling you a drama queen because in this thread, you make all kinds of wild and personal statements about me without backing them up empirically. I’ve asked you over and over again to provide empirical support for your specific claims about me, and you have failed to do so. Each time, you just move on to new insults.

    And now, apparently because I smoked salvia divinorum one night as a public experiment, you’re calling me an addict. Except, of course, you haven’t done it directly, I suppose because you prefer to be passive aggressive. No, you just made the allusion, which perhaps your friends have never told you is REALLY, REALLY ANNOYING.

    Just cut it out and say what you mean, if you have the guts. If you’re going to accuse me of being an addict for smoking salvia divinorum one evening, have the personal courage to do so directly to me. Then I will laugh a big belly laugh, because that must be the silliest thing I’ve ever heard.

    Say it or shut up.

    This is what I mean when I call you a drama queen.

    I have no problem with people who don’t smoke salvia divinorum.

    I have a problem with people (let me be direct — LIKE YOU –) who project their own personal life and difficulty onto others and use that to try to tell other people what to do with their lives. That bugs the shit out of me. Try to get away with it on a Republican blog. You won’t get away with it here.

  24. Iroquois Honky says:

    Where did I make “wild and personal statements”?
    Where did I call you an addict?
    Where did I “move on to new insults”?
    Where did I “tell other people what to do with their lives”?
    If you want to disagree with something I said, please have the intellectual honesty to quote me directly; don’t put words in my mouth.
    I think this time you’re the one who’s being sarcastic.

  25. Jim says:

    Let’s focus on your last piece of writing, and the “addict” game.

    “The game of heaping distain is one often played by addicts who desperately want to continue their addiction. Some of them can get very good at painting themselves as the victim. Look at the above posts and watch Jim pull out all the emotional stops…”

    You are either, in a big-time passive-aggressive move, calling me an addict right there, or you are engaged in some of the most accidentally misleading writing I’ve seen in a long time.

    Either you need to practice saying what you mean, or you need to practice your writing skills.

  26. Jim says:

    By the way, I realize upon reflection that I actually am an addict. I’m absolutely hooked on coffee. That’s an empirical fact which you can observe yourself if you drop by my house at about 6:45 on a typical morning.

    Please forgive me for my deep moral sin.

  27. Iroquois Honky says:

    No, Jim, I don’t think you are an addict or sense that you have any substance abuse issues, at least yet. I have been wrong before and I could be wrong here, but that’s not what I’m trying to say.

    My comment was more about the “heaping distain” game. Reardon wants to use “heaping distain” as a tool for controlling addictions in other people. Your motives in playing the “distain game” in the above piece are unclear, but the rhetoric was pretty over the top, and was used to defend drug use.

    Your laundry list of nasty adjectives describing those who don’t use drugs is only a taste of what an experienced substance abuser can use to defend a self-destructive lifestyle. It is one of the reasons that as a caseworker I always stayed away from those issues. There is little point in trying to intervene –substance abusers can be vicious in the quest to damage themselves, but they will hit bottom sooner rather than later without any help whatsoever. I did have the bureaucratic capability to deny benefits if someone refused counseling, but I only wrote referrals twice, at the request of the client, after making sure they understood their benefits would stop if they did not show up for the appointment. Then I routed the paperwork, very properly, through channels where I knew it would get lost. So you see, in my own life I have been scrupulous not to interfere with someone else’s right to destroy themselves.

    None of this really explains the vitriolic level of name-calling and loaded language you used to defend the drug experiment.

  28. Iroquois Honky says:

    When I was in my 30’s, back in the age of dinosaurs, I sincerely believed I was addicted to coffee. Every morning I would get up at a particularly inreasonable hour, make coffee with my eyes closed, then go take a shit before starting my commute. It seems the coffee stimulated defecation and turned it into an easily scheduled event. These days, nothing short of raisons can get me into the bathroom.

    Coffee is now considered to be a purely psychological addiction. Apparently I wasn’t really addicted to coffee, I was just full of shit.

  29. Jim says:

    Hmm. Johns Hopkins refers to coffee addiction and withdrawal symptoms.

    This matches my experience, again in college. I was part of an experiment in which I took neurological exams, drank ten cups of coffee a day for two weeks, went cold turkey, then took neurological exams again. I will for the rest of my life remember day number 2 of cold turkey, staggering across the quad to the research lab with a headache so big it was nearly blinding.

  30. Jim says:

    Read carefully. Those names and labels refer to those who would prohibit others from doing as they themselves see fit, even when there is no empirical evidence to support their prohibitionist zeal.

  31. Iroquois Honky says:

    Jim, too bad you weren’t in the double-blind decaf placebo group or the double blind placebo laxative group…

    I’m over the river and through the woods for fireworks, so you will have to keep yourself honest for a while. In my absence you might want to polish up your Persecution Complex, oh, rats, it’s not even in the DMSIII-R, but trust me, it’s wearing a bit thin.

  32. Jim says:

    It’s not a complex if there actually are people who are trying to stop others from doing as they see fit.

    And there are.

  33. Helen says:

    Interesting that many are looking in to the benefits of salvia being the ANTI-addiction drug. There are already re-habs how use it for fighting heroin, cocaine and yes, even alcohol. This is NOT A RECREATIONAL drug but a medicinal herb. I can’t believe anyone would even consider driving a car or taking it in a public place. People need to do research before “indulging”.

  34. Eduardo says:

    I read your article Jim, and I understand you completely. I myself have used salvia, along with magic mushrooms and marijuana. I feel that these “drugs” have done a lot of positive things for my life, I reflect deeply, look into life, feel closer too nature, and I am a lot happier once everything is done. The problem with it is, stupid people fuck it up for the rest of us. I feel that I am a very responsible “drug abuser” and it seems like you are aswell. It’s the people that smoke an L, go driving and hit little girls, that ruin it for the rest of us. The bad always seems to have a bigger impact, and spread faster than the good.

    I feel your pain big homie, IH just keeps talking about other “drugs” the shit that we need to get rid of (alcohol, heroine, cocaine, crack, extacy). Thats the shit that ruins lives, they’re used to get you fucked up, instead of helping to enlighten you.

    I’ve been enlightened !

  35. ???? says:

    It is not something you smoke to look like a bad ass, If anything, the experience seems to attract a more mature and intellectual audience. Based on my own pesonal experience with salvia, the intense “trip” that salvia can produce may be any where from terrifying to spiritually enlightening and many people including myself have resolved deep rooted anxiety through the use of this drug. however, it should be noted that can also be an unsettling reminder that we are not always in control as we may think we are. So with that being said it should be stated that YOU WILL NOT GET HIGH OFF SALVIA like you may after smoking marijuana because the experiences are completely different in almost every way and the only way it is like alchohol at all is in its inebriating quality. Smoking salvia should be thought more as a Crude lesson that sometimes it shows us perspectives that we may not be ready to see. So be carefull! Not much is known about the plant and that is not something to be taken lightly.

  36. John says:

    I would just like to say that ever since I was 18 I’ve been a binge drinker, and my mom is definitely one of those predisposed to addiction. I have had at least one beer almost every day since I turned 21, I have binged to the point of alcohol poisoning (Waking up covered in vomit from head to toe) twice, and about 3 months ago I started using salvia about once or twice a week. On one high level dose a month ago, I saw Something, and it made me want to turn my life around. I have become serious about wanting to enhance my career, find a mate, get my house cleaned up which I have neglected for 6 months, and I have had exactly three beers in the past month. I went back to church for the first time in a long time, and I’m cleaning out all the junk in my kitchen, which to my horror had mouse nests and droppings in the back corners of my cabinets. I have been able to control my eating habits (I weigh around 300 lbs), and I have pulled my belt in two notches since using Salvia. I believe it is literally a life saver for me, so take that, Iroqouis. You obviously don’t know Sally. It was scary when I saw the Thing, I think it must have shown me my own mortality and that I really do have Free Will and control over my own actions and how they affect my life.

  37. Vynce says:

    (John’s experience, from what i have heard, is fairly common. people often seem to get a religious or spiritual trip out of salvia.)

  38. Iroquois says:

    There was a similar comment in the diaries a while back, where someone’s experience with salvia led to resolution of other substance issues. Up ’til now it was an isolated anecdote. The Salvia people don’t seem to hang around much for conversation, they say their piece and move along.

    LSD also had a lot of religious claims made about it in its day. The late Jerry Garcia claimed to have seen God “up close enough to see the pimples”. I never heard LSD being personified like salvia though.

  39. Jim says:

    Now I’m thinking about the Holy Pustules. Do we have to kiss them? Strike one for Heaven.

  40. Pingback: Irregular Times: News Unfit for Print » Unempirical Psychobabble Bugs the Living Excrement Out of Me
  41. Trackback: Irregular Times: News Unfit for Print » Unempirical Psychobabble Bugs the Living Excrement Out of Me
  42. jiggedy says:

    I predict a growing number of salvia related deaths basid on my experience with the drug. I am new to it and find it to be much like l.s.d. inwhich I experamented with in the 90’s. I am not a hater, just telling it like it is from my point of view. I also know that the drug can affect people in many different ways accordingly. Imagination plays a huge part aswell as mood and atmosphere.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!