Oilahuasca

rory420420

Well-Known Member
Menu

EXCLUSIVEDECEMBER 11, 2013
This New Study Found More Drugs in Our Drinking Water Than Anybody Knew
And no one's doing anything about it
253Tweet
3.8kShare
By Dawn Fallik Photo: Image via shutterstock.com

Doctors prescribe hydrocodone for pain. They recommend ranitidine for acid reflux, a diuretic called hydrochlorothiazide for congestive heart failure.

But you don’t need a prescription to get these drugs in tiny doses. They're found already in our nation's water supply—and, according to an upcoming national study, the largest done so far, in higher amounts than drug companies anticipated.

We know how the drugs get there: Our bodies release them when we urinate or flush old drugs down the toilet. And it’s well known by now that pharmaceuticals are affecting fish, frogs and lobsters—small amounts of estrogen cause male fish to develop eggs, for instance. But the impact on human health is unclear. Although research on pharmaceuticals in the water supply began almost a decade ago, no one seems to know which compounds need to be removed or how to remove them from the water safely. And no one seems to know which government agency should step forward and take action.

“All of these drugs out there on the market are going to be discharged into the environment and we don’t know what the effects are, because there’s no requirement to do an assessment on the front end,” said Nick Schroeck, executive director of the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center in Detroit.

“We’re not trying to scare anyone, but we need to know what these chemical compounds will do to the environment and what are the long-term effects for humans. No one seems to know.”

The new study, which will be released in January in the journal Environmental Pollution, was obtained by The New Republic. Conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency, it is the largest study of water coming out of wastewater treatment plants.

It looked at samples from 50 large-size wastewater treatment plants nationwide and tested for 56 drugs including oxycodone, high-blood pressure medications, and over-the-counter drugs like Tylenol and ibuprofen. More than half the samples tested positive for at least 25 of the drugs monitored, the study said. High blood pressure medications appeared in the highest concentrations and most frequently.

“We were surprised to find that many drugs occurring across all the wastewater plants,” said Mitchell Kostich, the EPA research biologist who led the study. “We were also surprised to see so many drugs of a particular class—the high blood pressure medications—appear at those levels across the board.”

One reason for the higher numbers is better technology, which can trace drugs at smaller amounts. But it’s also because we’re taking more drugs than ever, from over-the-counter medications for headaches to prescription medications for depression, acid reflux, and high blood pressure. According to a Mayo Clinic study released in June, nearly 70 percent of Americans take one prescription drug, up from 48 percent in 2007-2008.

Health officials say these compounds in water pose a low risk to humans. But they also said that there are no good models to predict the effect this cocktail of low-level medications would have on human or aquatic life. Right now, there are no federal or state regulations requiring drinking water or wastewater plants to monitor pharmaceutical compounds in water.

“Who would have thought that those trace amounts would be having that impact on fish?” said Raanan Bloom, senior environmental officer for the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, the FDA division that oversees most medications and reviews new applications. “We didn’t expect that to happen at those concentrations.”

When a pharmaceutical company applies for new drug approval, it has to submit an estimate of how much that drug will end up in the environment. They use a model based on how many people they estimate will take the drug, how it will pass through the body, and how it degrades in water. If the estimate is over 1 part per billion (ppb) the FDA can ask for a more thorough evaluation of how that drug will affect aquatic life.

On July 7, 2010, two environmental groups—the National Resources Defense Council and the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center—filed a citizen’s petition asking the FDA to ask for a more thorough evaluation for all new drug applications, no matter what the estimate.

Last February, the FDA denied the petition. In its reply, the agency said the groups did not account for the significant dilution that occurs after compounds leave a wastewater treatment plant. The agency also said it could ask for more complete assessments for certain classes of drugs that present “extraordinary circumstances” to do serious harm to the environment.

Although eight of the drugs in the EPA study came in at maximum levels above that 1 ppb “brightline,” FDA officials said it would be a challenge to go back and ask the pharmaceutical companies to re-evaluate.

Shane Snyder is co-director at the Arizona Laboratory for Emerging Contaminants at the University of Arizona and has been working on pharmaceuticals in the water supply for more than a decade.

So far, there have not been any studies showing effects on human health. It is particularly difficult to study the effects on the most vulnerable populations: pregnant women and the elderly. But Snyder is frustrated that nothing has been done about the drugs that have already been found to be definitely problematic for aquatic life.

“Look at estrogen and endocrine disruptors—here’s a case where there is compelling evidence that it has an effect on aquatic life and still nothing has been done,” said Snyder.

Snyder said it would not be that difficult to figure out how to remove the compounds from the water, but it might be costly and the byproducts might be worse than the original contaminants.

“If you put in ozone or advance oxidization to take out a compound, when you oxidize chemicals it becomes something different,” he said. “So while it’s no longer a statin it’s now some byproduct. It’s now very common to make water more toxic after treatment than it was before treatment.”

Andrew Sawyers, the current EPA administrator for water, declined to be interviewed for this article. An EPA spokesman said the Office of Water was not yet prepared to comment on the report.

So what’s next? More studies. The FDA says it is working on human health studies. And Kostich, the head of the EPA's study, said he planned to focus next on the impact of the hypertension medication on aquatic life.

"It’s hard to know where to start,” he said. “How do you take the blood pressure of a fish?"

Schroeck, of the Great Lakes Environmental Center, said he’d like to see future studies focus on that low-level mixture.

“The scary thing for me is not one particular drug, although do I want to be drinking Viagra in my water? No,” said Shroeck. “It’s potentially hundreds or thousands of compounds interacting with each other and how that affects aquatic life and human health.”

“It’s great that we keep coming up with new and interesting drugs, but we have to look at what the potential impacts are,” he continued. “It’s almost too late to try and put the genie back in the bottle."
 

WHODAT@THADOR

Well-Known Member
PINNED POST
News Feed


Ryan Gallagher
October 5, 2013
To understand what we hope for in terms of results, you must understand where the idea comes from.

In 1894 Britain was an imperialist kingdom that owned much of the known world, including India. British officials in India were afraid that Cannabis was affecting the Indian population, not only mentally, but morally.

So they went around India collecting anecdotes and eye witness accounts from over 1,000 people, and in the end decided that marijuana was safer than alcohol, and safe enough for people. But this book is about Marijuana, so medical science tends to ignore it, plus it is 8 books of medicalish British, so it's just not practical to read.

But if I can make a modern version...
With MORE than one country (hopefully at least 10 countries)
With MORE than 1,000 people
With Video, Written & Photo evidence...

I think we can make a document that will be used for the next few generations as a base for study, as well as a base for expansion of thought and research. Because the writing is a SMALL part of what we are doing, this project is so much bigger than it looks, and will be a grassroots for so much education.
 

WHODAT@THADOR

Well-Known Member
Menu

EXCLUSIVEDECEMBER 11, 2013
This New Study Found More Drugs in Our Drinking Water Than Anybody Knew
And no one's doing anything about it
253Tweet
3.8kShare
By Dawn Fallik Photo: Image via shutterstock.com

Doctors prescribe hydrocodone for pain. They recommend ranitidine for acid reflux, a diuretic called hydrochlorothiazide for congestive heart failure.

But you don’t need a prescription to get these drugs in tiny doses. They're found already in our nation's water supply—and, according to an upcoming national study, the largest done so far, in higher amounts than drug companies anticipated.

We know how the drugs get there: Our bodies release them when we urinate or flush old drugs down the toilet. And it’s well known by now that pharmaceuticals are affecting fish, frogs and lobsters—small amounts of estrogen cause male fish to develop eggs, for instance. But the impact on human health is unclear. Although research on pharmaceuticals in the water supply began almost a decade ago, no one seems to know which compounds need to be removed or how to remove them from the water safely. And no one seems to know which government agency should step forward and take action.

“All of these drugs out there on the market are going to be discharged into the environment and we don’t know what the effects are, because there’s no requirement to do an assessment on the front end,” said Nick Schroeck, executive director of the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center in Detroit.

“We’re not trying to scare anyone, but we need to know what these chemical compounds will do to the environment and what are the long-term effects for humans. No one seems to know.”

The new study, which will be released in January in the journal Environmental Pollution, was obtained by The New Republic. Conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency, it is the largest study of water coming out of wastewater treatment plants.

It looked at samples from 50 large-size wastewater treatment plants nationwide and tested for 56 drugs including oxycodone, high-blood pressure medications, and over-the-counter drugs like Tylenol and ibuprofen. More than half the samples tested positive for at least 25 of the drugs monitored, the study said. High blood pressure medications appeared in the highest concentrations and most frequently.

“We were surprised to find that many drugs occurring across all the wastewater plants,” said Mitchell Kostich, the EPA research biologist who led the study. “We were also surprised to see so many drugs of a particular class—the high blood pressure medications—appear at those levels across the board.”

One reason for the higher numbers is better technology, which can trace drugs at smaller amounts. But it’s also because we’re taking more drugs than ever, from over-the-counter medications for headaches to prescription medications for depression, acid reflux, and high blood pressure. According to a Mayo Clinic study released in June, nearly 70 percent of Americans take one prescription drug, up from 48 percent in 2007-2008.

Health officials say these compounds in water pose a low risk to humans. But they also said that there are no good models to predict the effect this cocktail of low-level medications would have on human or aquatic life. Right now, there are no federal or state regulations requiring drinking water or wastewater plants to monitor pharmaceutical compounds in water.

“Who would have thought that those trace amounts would be having that impact on fish?” said Raanan Bloom, senior environmental officer for the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, the FDA division that oversees most medications and reviews new applications. “We didn’t expect that to happen at those concentrations.”

When a pharmaceutical company applies for new drug approval, it has to submit an estimate of how much that drug will end up in the environment. They use a model based on how many people they estimate will take the drug, how it will pass through the body, and how it degrades in water. If the estimate is over 1 part per billion (ppb) the FDA can ask for a more thorough evaluation of how that drug will affect aquatic life.

On July 7, 2010, two environmental groups—the National Resources Defense Council and the Great Lakes Environmental Law Center—filed a citizen’s petition asking the FDA to ask for a more thorough evaluation for all new drug applications, no matter what the estimate.

Last February, the FDA denied the petition. In its reply, the agency said the groups did not account for the significant dilution that occurs after compounds leave a wastewater treatment plant. The agency also said it could ask for more complete assessments for certain classes of drugs that present “extraordinary circumstances” to do serious harm to the environment.

Although eight of the drugs in the EPA study came in at maximum levels above that 1 ppb “brightline,” FDA officials said it would be a challenge to go back and ask the pharmaceutical companies to re-evaluate.

Shane Snyder is co-director at the Arizona Laboratory for Emerging Contaminants at the University of Arizona and has been working on pharmaceuticals in the water supply for more than a decade.

So far, there have not been any studies showing effects on human health. It is particularly difficult to study the effects on the most vulnerable populations: pregnant women and the elderly. But Snyder is frustrated that nothing has been done about the drugs that have already been found to be definitely problematic for aquatic life.

“Look at estrogen and endocrine disruptors—here’s a case where there is compelling evidence that it has an effect on aquatic life and still nothing has been done,” said Snyder.

Snyder said it would not be that difficult to figure out how to remove the compounds from the water, but it might be costly and the byproducts might be worse than the original contaminants.

“If you put in ozone or advance oxidization to take out a compound, when you oxidize chemicals it becomes something different,” he said. “So while it’s no longer a statin it’s now some byproduct. It’s now very common to make water more toxic after treatment than it was before treatment.”

Andrew Sawyers, the current EPA administrator for water, declined to be interviewed for this article. An EPA spokesman said the Office of Water was not yet prepared to comment on the report.

So what’s next? More studies. The FDA says it is working on human health studies. And Kostich, the head of the EPA's study, said he planned to focus next on the impact of the hypertension medication on aquatic life.

"It’s hard to know where to start,” he said. “How do you take the blood pressure of a fish?"

Schroeck, of the Great Lakes Environmental Center, said he’d like to see future studies focus on that low-level mixture.

“The scary thing for me is not one particular drug, although do I want to be drinking Viagra in my water? No,” said Shroeck. “It’s potentially hundreds or thousands of compounds interacting with each other and how that affects aquatic life and human health.”

“It’s great that we keep coming up with new and interesting drugs, but we have to look at what the potential impacts are,” he continued. “It’s almost too late to try and put the genie back in the bottle."
Drooling Crotch Walrus, TheNoun
Definition 1: A wet pussy that has two sno-cone cups inserted into it as tusks.
Usage Example: "I have often sought the elusive Drooling Crotch Walrus."
 

green_machine_two9er

Well-Known Member
Now that I know Oilahuasca exists, the Synchronized Hyperspace Event (S.H.E.) will be a lot easier to share with everyone.

This Christmas season, I am going to be complaining about a "War on Christmas" where I am going to complain that there are people dressing like Santa, putting up Christmas lights, and NOT taking any Hallucinogenic substances. It's HERESY.

If people are going to celebrate Christmas, they need to celebrate it all the way. So now that I know about Oilahuasca, I am going to test it out, make some videos showing people how to make a cup of coffee that can make you feel like you are on Ecstasy.

THAT is what Christmas lights are FOR. End the war on Christmas!
why dont you just take some exstasy?
 

rory420420

Well-Known Member
cept the college kid who packed his lunch and sat beside me..nasty cheap cold cuts..and i have a hyper-sensitive olfactory sense..oscar mayer salami for 2 hours..smelled like the room after fin spanks it...ugg.
other than that,im ok..just need a dab.reaaaaaaly need a dab.:-)
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
If anyone wants to get in to dream stuff, but doesn't want to spend the money involved in any of the processes. You can get FREE (you earn it for writing, which everyone on the internet does) through Devtome.

If you have heard of Bitcoin, there is another coin called "Devcoin". You earn FREE Devcoins for every 1,000 words you write on Devtome. To make a Devtome account, search Google for "Devcoin Official" and there will be a thread on Bitcoin talk. Talk to the people there, and they can tell you how to make a Devtome account (you just have to talk to a certain admin and they will make the account).

Once you have an account you just write your words, then in about a month or so you get paid Devcoins into your Devcoin wallet.
Here is a link to check how long everything has left:
http://dvccountdown.blisteringdevelopers.com/

Then you can use those Devcoins to either buy other coins (Like PoS coins, which allow you to earn money by having coins in your wallet, like Hobonickle.

Or, you can trade your Devcoins for Bitcoins on a website like:
https://vircurex.com/welcome/index?alt=btc&base=dvc&locale=en

And, Paypal accepts Bitcoins now.
 

Finshaggy

Well-Known Member
I did some more personal research on Oilahuasca and found some interesting things.

I am sure the Enzymes have a lot to do with the effects, because apparently people get the Oilahuasca effects from just a few drops. So, by listing these compounds I am not saying that they are the reason for the effects of Oilahuasca, but they are in these plants.

Pepper = Peperidine (Supplement: BioPeridine, available on Amazon)
Anise = Anethole (a Phenethylamine)
Parsley & Dill = Apiole (a Phenethylamine)
Acorus Calamus = Asarone (a Phenethylamine)
Betel = Chavicol (a Phenethylamine that is a stimulant without enzyme inhibitors)
Elemi = Elemicin (a Phenethylamine, many say it feels like Mescaline when activated)
Basil = Methyl Chavicol (a Phenethylamine)
Clove = Eugenol (a Phenethylamine)
Raw Soy Beans = Phenethylamine
Mucuna Seed = L-DOPA and tons of Tryptamines

All of these are things that can help in Oilahuasca. You can also get Oxytocin nose spray or tongue drops, I have not heard of anyone trying it, but it makes sense that this would help, since things like Ecstasy release Oxytocin.

A thing that HAS been used to boost the experience is NMDA Receptor Antagonists, which is another trait ecstasy has. Which can be found in DXM (Delsym Cough Syrup) or in a few different plants. But just like the oils, if these things are added, it should be in small amounts since you are turning off the enzymes in your body that usually break these things down.
 
Top