On ethnography, hallucinogens, improvised knife, etc.

Rick · 13th August 2009, 06:38 PM

Anyone here read 'At Play In The Fields of the Lord' ?

The movie ??
Meh .

We share the same planet but not the same world .

fearn · 13th August 2009, 07:44 PM

I'd also point out that plants do make sounds pretty routinely. Trees creak and groan under strain, and if you have a stethoscope, you can hear the sounds of fluids moving within the stems.

Yes, I'm aware that this is probably not what the "singing hallucinogenic plants" is about, but it's just as short-sighted to think that plants don't make sounds, move, communicate with each other, or sense their environments. Each of these has been proven by science, and none of these is news to anyone who pays close attention to plants in any culture.

Best,

F

David · 13th August 2009, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick

We share the same planet but not the same world .

Ain't that the truth.

Wow, this conversation sure is getting esoteric....and way off forum topic. Hope those other mods don't shut us down.

Yes Fearn, creaking and groaning under stress and fluids running through plant systems is definitely not what we are talking about here, nor is it plants sensing their environments or even communicating with each other. What we are talking about is basically a "shamanistic" journeying experience where information about plant use is brought back from the journey and applied to "real" life situations....and proves to actually be correct and work! Certainly it is next to impossible to verify these experiences in any scientific way, but results are still results and i am not one to argue with them. Anyone who has had a peyote or "magic" mushroom experience can probably relate better to this, but maybe discussions of such personal experiences might be better left to private chats.

So i get what you are saying Fearn, really i do. The 99% of untested plants in the Amazon are not likely to yield anywhere near the number of medicinal drugs that we have already discovered in that 1 percentile. But what if they yield just a fraction, say 100 new drugs....or just 50....or only 25? What if they yield just one. What if that one is the cure for leukemia?

fearn · 13th August 2009, 09:23 PM

Hi David,

Check out Vincristine or vinblastine (link). We already have leukemia drugs from tropical plants.

Anyway, I know more about shamanism than I'm willing to talk about here, but that's only half my point. A bigger point is that we're assuming that, because they're hallucinogens, the people must have been hallucinating to hear the song. I don't know that Davis went out to check, but for all I know, you can hear the difference around the different cultivars of that vine. Maybe it has to do with the mosquitos that were buzzing around it, or something. Miguel's comment was right on: most shamans aren't stupid, and the ones I've met are pretty darn observant. Instead of wallowing in the mysticism of the comment, it's good to ask them whether they can teach you to hear that song, so that you can evaluate their evidence for yourself. It might be that all you have to do is stand under a vine and listen, simple as that.

As for the cost of finding a new drug.... That's a complex question. I'll approach it by telling some anecdotes.

1. A lot of the initial scientific research on Echinacea is incorrect, because the researchers were bad taxonomists and chose the wrong species for their sample. Moral: Correct identification is CRITICAL. This week, the New York times ran an article, one of many noting how taxonomy is a disappearing science. Think about the connection for a second.

2. Drug companies can only make money off of novel products. There's a huge number of drug plants out there, but as one herbalist noted, "how many cures for an upset stomach do you need to know, anyway?" A lot of plants have similar chemicals and work in similar ways. Good for the herbalists, but useless for the drug prospectors. If they can't patent it in some form, they're not interested.

2b. How much does it cost to screen plants? Depends on the method. Davis and his cohorts try to short-circuit the screening process by checking out known herbal medicines. Still, it costs around a billion $US to bring a drug to market in the US, and that includes finding something that might work, clearing all regulatory hurdles and safety tests, plus that wonderful 30% of the budget to marketing (When the time is right...Cialis). This raises the question of how much it is worth to go prospecting, considering how big the strike has to be to pay off for the financiers.

2c. Who owns the knowledge? A company in Texas patented bismati rice, and someone attempted to patent yoga, both in the US. The Indian government has been creating a multi-lingual database of ayurvedic healing preparations, so that anyone who tries to patent a traditional Indian drug in another country can have their patent rejected out-of-hand. Nevertheless, people will use the patent process, especially in the US, to take advantage of tradtional knowledge and even to lock out the people who gave them that knowledge as a gift. I think Davis is a strong advocate for traditional knowledge, but there still is the question about whether the healers and shamans should be talking to him at all, if someone else is going to exploit their knowledge without recompensing them.

2d. Similarly, one can look at the drug molecules as a form of knowledge, and talk about whether the drug prospectors are willing to pay to conserve the forest they're prospecting in. In many cases, they are not, because the economics are messy. You only have to find the drug until you can synthesize it in a lab. Once it's synthesized, the forest is irrelevant to the drug company. Whether this is fair and reasonable is an ethical question.

As I noted before, bioprospecting is a fad among drug companies with about a ten-year return interval. What happens is that they send out a bunch of drug prospectors, test whatever they find, and if they're lucky, bring something to market. If not, they get discouraged, and turn to some other field (like combinatorial chemistry or metagenomics, or whatever) to find new sources for potential drugs. When those fields don't pan out, they hear about some new, neat research about a class of novel biologicals, say the antibiotics found in the skins of frogs, and off they go to the jungle again.

And so it goes. Long answer to a short question, David, but bioprospecting really is like any other form of prospecting. It's risky, and as a result, it tends to be faddish. Is it worth it? You tell me. I'm too busy panning for gold, given the current inflated market

(oh wait, that was last year

).

Best,

F

Andrew · 13th August 2009, 09:54 PM

This thread has drifted way off topic!!!!111!!!11one!!

Let's get immediately back to fecal blades and penis-bone knives.

Rick · 13th August 2009, 10:17 PM

Pass the Ayahuasca .

fearn · 13th August 2009, 11:10 PM

Sure thing. Fine by me boss.

Actually, it is interesting, because we collector-types don't normally collect improvised or discardable knives. Exceptions out there? Anyone? Still, it's an interesting area for those interested in very basic ideas of design (i.e., the category, "sharp edges, what can I make them from, part XXX.")

Interestingly, there's a howto on how to make an ice knife. Don't know if it works, as it's summer here. Maybe someday I'll find out.

As for the drugs, I'm surprised that no ones gotten into the curare angle. That's as neat a story as any, and it does have collectible artifacts associated with it. Blowguns anyone?

Best,

F

David · 13th August 2009, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fearn

Anyway, I know more about shamanism than I'm willing to talk about here, but that's only half my point. A bigger point is that we're assuming that, because they're hallucinogens, the people must have been hallucinating to hear the song.

hmmm....well i, for one am not assuming that. Firstly i prefer to refer to these substances as entheogens. Hallucinations imply something that is not really there. I do not believe that is the case with the visions produced by these substances. Nor do i believe that these substances are necessary in order to hear the plants "sing", but they have been know to guide the people to the knowledge of this kind of listening.
And i guess you are right, we do already have a couple of leukemia drugs from tropically plants so i guess it makes no sense to keep looking for one that might actually cure the disease.

David · 13th August 2009, 11:16 PM

The ice knife idea is cool

, but if you already have the chisel, rock or stick needed to fashion it i think you might make a better, more permanent knife out of them.

Blow guns are also neat things, but i am afraid i do not have any. True though that we haven't had much discussion of them on these forums.

fearn · 13th August 2009, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

hmmm....well i, for one am not assuming that. Firstly i prefer to refer to these substances as entheogens. Hallucinations imply something that is not really there. I do not believe that is the case with the visions produced by these substances. Nor do i believe that these substances are necessary in order to hear the plants "sing", but they have been know to guide the people to the knowledge of this kind of listening.
And i guess you are right, we do already have a couple of leukemia drugs from tropically plants so i guess it makes no sense to keep looking for one that might actually cure the disease.

Hi David,

I used to work at a hospital in the Bay Area, in the early 90s, when AIDS was really becoming epidemic. A doctor had gotten a birthday card that said, "Remember when childhood leukemia was lethal, and sex wasn't?" That was back in the 1970s. Childhood leukemia is now one of the most curable cancers, thanks in part to vincristine and similar plant drugs. I think of it as a success story, even though we don't have a 100% cure rate.

Now, if there was a drug out there to cure stupidity, I could use that!

As for what to call mind-altering plants, you're right. If I call them entheogens, someone gets mad, if I call them hallucinogens, someone gets mad, if I call them medicines, someone gets mad, if I call them drugs, someone gets mad, and if I call them poisons, someone gets mad. This is not to insult you in any way, but to point out that such plants are a touchy subject for our society, and I don't think there's a neutral way to talk about them. At least the term hallucinogens has been around long enough for you to know what I'm talking about, more or less. In my mind, that shared communication is reason enough to use the term.

Best,

F

David · 13th August 2009, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fearn

Now, if there was a drug out there to cure stupidity, I could use that!

Ain't that the truth.

And please don't misunderstand. I am in no way angered by your use of the term hallucinogen. Just explaining my point of view. And i do understand that entheogen is not a word that the general masses would recognize.

migueldiaz · 14th August 2009, 12:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fearn

... Hope this helps. It's nothing like a linear calculation. It's more like gold-mining.

Fearn, it wasn't helpful. It was super

Thanks for the elaboration.

And being a mining engineer who in my younger days had been blasting gold veins deep within the bowels of our mountains, I know exactly what you mean.

But hopefully not hoping against hope, I still look forward to the day when more drugs will be discovered, be they coming from plants or insects of the rain forests or from elsewhere.

Quote:

Originally Posted by David

I believe that even you and i would be able to hear the plants singing under the moonlight if we were to participate in a peyote ceremony.

Then what are we waiting for?

Earlier all I know was that the day destroys the night, and night divides the day. Now I feel like breaking through to the other side

But as mentioned, enough talking about shamans and chemically-assisted meditations!

On a more serious note, I'm sure we all agree with Vandoo when he said:

Quote:

Originally Posted by VANDOO

FOR ALL MAN'S ACCOMPLISHMENTS AND KNOWLEGE IT WOULD BE JUST A SMALL SPECK AMONG ALL THAT GOD HAS CREATED. WE HAVE AN AWFUL LOT TO LEARN AND REALLY ARENT THAT SMART AFTER ALL.

Referring to Davis again in the video, it's of course true that our present techie world is but just 300 years old. With all the progress it has made, I hope people will also not forget to tap into the wisdom of the ancients. Their knowledge gathered over a course of thousands of years, is to me a more valuable gold mine ... which reminds me of one of the greatest tragedies ever, the burning of the ancient library of Alexandria *sigh*

We would have found a lot of info there for sure regarding metallurgy, ancient weapons, if we are to go back to the subject as we should ...

13th August 2009, 06:38 PM	#1
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,339	Anyone here read 'At Play In The Fields of the Lord' ? The movie ?? Meh . We share the same planet but not the same world .

13th August 2009, 07:44 PM	#2
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	I'd also point out that plants do make sounds pretty routinely. Trees creak and groan under strain, and if you have a stethoscope, you can hear the sounds of fluids moving within the stems. Yes, I'm aware that this is probably not what the "singing hallucinogenic plants" is about, but it's just as short-sighted to think that plants don't make sounds, move, communicate with each other, or sense their environments. Each of these has been proven by science, and none of these is news to anyone who pays close attention to plants in any culture. Best, F

13th August 2009, 09:23 PM	#4
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Hi David, Check out Vincristine or vinblastine (link). We already have leukemia drugs from tropical plants. Anyway, I know more about shamanism than I'm willing to talk about here, but that's only half my point. A bigger point is that we're assuming that, because they're hallucinogens, the people must have been hallucinating to hear the song. I don't know that Davis went out to check, but for all I know, you can hear the difference around the different cultivars of that vine. Maybe it has to do with the mosquitos that were buzzing around it, or something. Miguel's comment was right on: most shamans aren't stupid, and the ones I've met are pretty darn observant. Instead of wallowing in the mysticism of the comment, it's good to ask them whether they can teach you to hear that song, so that you can evaluate their evidence for yourself. It might be that all you have to do is stand under a vine and listen, simple as that. As for the cost of finding a new drug.... That's a complex question. I'll approach it by telling some anecdotes. 1. A lot of the initial scientific research on Echinacea is incorrect, because the researchers were bad taxonomists and chose the wrong species for their sample. Moral: Correct identification is CRITICAL. This week, the New York times ran an article, one of many noting how taxonomy is a disappearing science. Think about the connection for a second. 2. Drug companies can only make money off of novel products. There's a huge number of drug plants out there, but as one herbalist noted, "how many cures for an upset stomach do you need to know, anyway?" A lot of plants have similar chemicals and work in similar ways. Good for the herbalists, but useless for the drug prospectors. If they can't patent it in some form, they're not interested. 2b. How much does it cost to screen plants? Depends on the method. Davis and his cohorts try to short-circuit the screening process by checking out known herbal medicines. Still, it costs around a billion $US to bring a drug to market in the US, and that includes finding something that might work, clearing all regulatory hurdles and safety tests, plus that wonderful 30% of the budget to marketing (When the time is right...Cialis). This raises the question of how much it is worth to go prospecting, considering how big the strike has to be to pay off for the financiers. 2c. Who owns the knowledge? A company in Texas patented bismati rice, and someone attempted to patent yoga, both in the US. The Indian government has been creating a multi-lingual database of ayurvedic healing preparations, so that anyone who tries to patent a traditional Indian drug in another country can have their patent rejected out-of-hand. Nevertheless, people will use the patent process, especially in the US, to take advantage of tradtional knowledge and even to lock out the people who gave them that knowledge as a gift. I think Davis is a strong advocate for traditional knowledge, but there still is the question about whether the healers and shamans should be talking to him at all, if someone else is going to exploit their knowledge without recompensing them. 2d. Similarly, one can look at the drug molecules as a form of knowledge, and talk about whether the drug prospectors are willing to pay to conserve the forest they're prospecting in. In many cases, they are not, because the economics are messy. You only have to find the drug until you can synthesize it in a lab. Once it's synthesized, the forest is irrelevant to the drug company. Whether this is fair and reasonable is an ethical question. As I noted before, bioprospecting is a fad among drug companies with about a ten-year return interval. What happens is that they send out a bunch of drug prospectors, test whatever they find, and if they're lucky, bring something to market. If not, they get discouraged, and turn to some other field (like combinatorial chemistry or metagenomics, or whatever) to find new sources for potential drugs. When those fields don't pan out, they hear about some new, neat research about a class of novel biologicals, say the antibiotics found in the skins of frogs, and off they go to the jungle again. And so it goes. Long answer to a short question, David, but bioprospecting really is like any other form of prospecting. It's risky, and as a result, it tends to be faddish. Is it worth it? You tell me. I'm too busy panning for gold, given the current inflated market (oh wait, that was last year ). Best, F

13th August 2009, 09:54 PM	#5
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	This thread has drifted way off topic!!!!111!!!11one!! Let's get immediately back to fecal blades and penis-bone knives.

13th August 2009, 10:17 PM	#6
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,339	Pass the Ayahuasca .

13th August 2009, 11:10 PM	#7
fearn Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,247	Sure thing. Fine by me boss. Actually, it is interesting, because we collector-types don't normally collect improvised or discardable knives. Exceptions out there? Anyone? Still, it's an interesting area for those interested in very basic ideas of design (i.e., the category, "sharp edges, what can I make them from, part XXX.") Interestingly, there's a howto on how to make an ice knife. Don't know if it works, as it's summer here. Maybe someday I'll find out. As for the drugs, I'm surprised that no ones gotten into the curare angle. That's as neat a story as any, and it does have collectible artifacts associated with it. Blowguns anyone? Best, F

13th August 2009, 11:16 PM	#9
David Keris forum moderator Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Nova Scotia Posts: 7,218	The ice knife idea is cool , but if you already have the chisel, rock or stick needed to fashion it i think you might make a better, more permanent knife out of them. Blow guns are also neat things, but i am afraid i do not have any. True though that we haven't had much discussion of them on these forums.