Child eats drugs on candy

[snopes]

A woman has been charged with physical abuse of a child after her 2-year-old daughter ate two LSD-laced candies the woman allegedly purchased and brought back to their apartment.

http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=642042

you see and here I thought this was going to be a story about a kid so hopped up on snickers bars that he raided his parent's lipitor stash.

Thank god that after a string of horribly irresponsible actions the women pulled out one responsible one and took the child to the hospital. I suspect that most such stories end without the child getting medical care at all so Mom can avoid prosecution, I hope that the Judge makes a very public point of reducing her eventual sentence for precisely this reason.

While the mother of this child is certainly irresponsible and thoughtlessly put her child as risk, there is at least some good news for those concerned about the effects of the LSD on the child.

It's very likely that the effects of what was probably a lower dose of LSD would not be particularly traumatic for the child (and the hospital would very likely have administered a mild sedative) and would not have lasting effects, wearing off over the course of 8-12 hours. Most street LSD of the last 20-30 years tends to be fairly weak.

Since many people are unfamiliar with the effects of LSD and how it's frequently delivered, it's worth pointing out the the tablets were likely not truly candy or candy-like at all in that they did not likely contain any sugar or flavoring. A common delivery method is the "microdot," which is a very tiny (usually colored) tablet approximately three sixteenths of an inch in diameter. I'm not saying that anyone has never used candy to deliver LSD, but I think it's most likely that they were the microdots I described.

[greenfrog78]

I've had it on sugar cubes Now that Major Accent chimed in with "the kid wasn't hurt" I feel free to add my comment. That was terrible drug abuse, wasting LSD on a kid who won't appreciate it!

[Artemis]

See, this is why you shouldn't touch Mommy's candy.

[geminilee]

I have to agree with major accent. Physically, LSD is a very safe drug, the "candy" was probably microdots, and thank DOYC that the kid did not get into any other drugs that may really have done some damage.

Originally Posted by greenfrog78

I've had it on sugar cubes

Ah yes, I neglected to mention this time honored (but less common today) delivery method.

I should also have pointed out that a substantial overdose of LSD (a risk with LSD delivered on blotter paper which may contain a hundred doses on a smallish piece of paper) for a child *would* be traumatic and take 6+ months for complete recovery. Unfortunately, there are at least a few accounts of accidental overdose in children.

The article says that the LSD candies resembled SweeTarts.

I'm not sure that a 2-year-old would be interested in microdots. It's possible I suppose. But s/he would certainly notice if something like the link above was left lying around.

I want to ask major accent and geminilee where they get their information about LSD being unharmful (or less harmful than other illegal drugs)?

[Spookshow Baby]

Places such as
http://www.nida.nih.gov/Infofacts/LSD.html
http://www.drugs.com/lsd.html
http://www.hull.ac.uk/php/ch4hl/lsd/risks.html

I have never heard of LSD to look like little tarts. But in the 60s i knew people who dropped lots of acid tabs (not that i would do anything like that ) and there were some who did give it to children. The kids just giggled a lot, but did not seem to be frightened or upset or have any bad reaction afterwards.

Originally Posted by Spookshow Baby

Places such as
http://www.nida.nih.gov/Infofacts/LSD.html
http://www.drugs.com/lsd.html
http://www.hull.ac.uk/php/ch4hl/lsd/risks.html

The top two state that LSD does not cause addiction/re-seeking behaviour in users, which would reduce the risk of habitual damage, but they still list some harmful effects of the drug.

The third link from Hull University does claim that LSD is not toxic, but it is a second-year degree project by a chemistry student who states on the homepage that his main reference is Wikipedia.

It's made me re-think, though. I always had LSD marked as a real frightener because I thought it had the potential to damage your mental health severely, even after just trying it once. It would be interesting to have that belief confirmed as groundless. (Particularly considering my own shady past )

[Spookshow Baby]

Well, that was the result of a 10 sec google search. There are many more sites with the same and similar information. When you do your own comparisons to other illicit substances, it tends to show that it probably has less negative health impacts.

[imjustasteph]

My guy said he did acid once years ago, and that he bought it on sweetarts.

[Xia]

I found this picture of LSD microdots, and they do resemble Sweetarts a bit. I'm not sure of the size difference however, I can't remember how big Sweetarts are. I've heard a form of LSD described as dots on paper and I always pictured something like those candy dots, which could be enticing to children. However I have no idea if it actually looks anything like that.

The "dots on paper" aren't much like those candy dots. What they actually are is liquid dripped onto a piece of blotter paper. Try mixing a couple of drops of food coloring with a teaspoon or so of water. Now put that into a medicine dropper, and place a row of drops about half an inch apart on a piece of blotter paper. You'll see little colored dots, but they won't have much, if any, texture beyond the texture of the paper itself.

I can speak from the experience of taking LSD some ten times over about two years, in college in the 70s. I was always scrupulously careful to take basic precautions, the first of which was to never trip alone. I always, always made sure to have at least one friend around who had done acid before and who knew I was. This, from my reading, is the common mistake made in virtually all the publicized stories of people coming to grief while tripping (Diane Linkletter, for one). They tripped alone, or got separated from their friends.

One friend of mine made this mistake the only time he tripped, and didn't enjoy it at all. With that exception, I've never known anyone who knows anyone who had a bad experience from acid. While I admit the possibility, I think it's mostly dangerous to someone who already has a severely fractured personality, or who has major current stress in their lives. Under those circumstances, LSD is not recommended, and tripping alone is potentially disastrous. Also, combining acid with other substances can set off any number of other side effects and complications.

I don't necessarily recommend it, although I loved it, but by taking a few very simple precautions the risk of a "bad trip" can be minimized. Most of the scare propaganda about LSD is exactly that.

Dog (Picture yourself in a boat on a river) Friendly

[Syllavus]

Originally Posted by Dog Friendly

This, from my reading, is the common mistake made in virtually all the publicized stories of people coming to grief while tripping (Diane Linkletter, for one)...

Ooh, I don't know what it's called when you get to reference a snopes article to a post on snopes but... there you go.

http://www.snopes.com/horrors/drugs/linkletter.asp

Wow. So she wasn't even on LSD at the time? Well, then, never mind about her as an example, except that this still supports my claim that a lot of the accusations leveled against LSD are so much garbage.

And I'm still persuaded that a large number of the sensationalized stories of people having a "bad trip" result from people tripping alone. To me, that's not unlike claiming that cars are dangerous because of people who have been injured riding on the outside of one. Cars may, indeed, still be dangerous, but to claim so on the evidence of people doing manifestly foolish things with cars is, at the least, intellectually dishonest.

Originally Posted by Neffti

The article says that the LSD candies resembled SweeTarts.

I'm not sure that a 2-year-old would be interested in microdots. It's possible I suppose. But s/he would certainly notice if something like the link above was left lying around.

I want to ask major accent and geminilee where they get their information about LSD being unharmful (or less harmful than other illegal drugs)?

I realize that this is a very controversial area of discussion, and oftentimes when the issue comes up it provokes very strong reactions from some individuals. There is concern that LSD may present a great danger, especially to children. From my perspective, however, overstating this danger is counterproductive.

I wouldn't make any claims about LSD being more or less harmful than any other drug. I'm not sure that comparisons would even be meaningful. I'm very wary of misinformation in this subject and would prefer to say that LSD is not unsafe and not safe. It's not easy to make clear and unambiguous statements about something so complex. Enough has been written about the experience to demonstrate that there is ample reason to be interested in taking LSD. Let any person (an adult of sound mind) make that choice for themselves.

My point was specifically to comment that this child would very likely not suffer any long term problems from this exposure.

My opinion is derived from a great deal of personal research, and research conducted as part of university studies. There exists a very large body of research into LSD's effects and consequences. I'm not a scholar in the subject and my interest has been largely personal. The subject is beyond the scope of any message board. LSD has been taken by millions of people in situations both controlled and uncontrolled, including thousands of American soldiers as part of systematic government research. The effects of LSD vary widely from individual to individual. Any generalization will result in more questions. However, from my understanding, I think that:

Moderate and infrequent doses of LSD do not seem to increase a healthy individual's risk for disease.

A healthy individual who experiences a massive accidental overdose (what's massive? I'd say maybe 50x or more of the average street dose) of LSD will probably recover completely within six months to a year or so. There may be visual effects or distortions that may persist longer but will gradually decrease in time.

A healthy individual who receives an accidental low dose exposure will likely experience no discomfort or problems beyond a day or two, especially if they are comforted and given a positive, low stress environment while the drug is active.

I had liberal parents and my Dad told me in my mid-teens about his own experiences with LSD and how, if I was ever to come into contact with it and decide to try it, to make sure I was amongst friends, have the evening planned, have someone nearby who didn't take any in case of emergencies, etc.

I have ummed and erred about posting this, but I had a bad trip about 15 years ago. It wasn't my first trip, and I was familiar with all the advice Dog Friendly lists above. I was the only one in the small group of intimate friends I was with to react badly that night, and none of us have a clue what triggered it. Two other friends had taken some from the same batch 3 nights before and had a wonderful time. For me, it was a very traumatic 14 hours with no way out (luckily I had friends present to distract and reassure me) and I had flashbacks for a couple of years afterwards. I still get the heebie-jeebies thinking about it now.

On the other hand, a different, earlier trip ranks among probably the top 5 events of my entire life. I thought I was an untroubled person taking calculated risks that would lead to a good time. I was a wrong'un. It's possible that the bad trip triggered some existing problem I wasn't aware of, but on balance, I very much regret my decision to take it.