http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/10/04/162299564/ketamine-relieves-depression-by-restoring-brain-connections

"one of the biggest findings in the field over the last 50 years"

I haven't been able to find an an article that lists the actual dosages, but I found this to be a very curious discovery. Again, like with marijuana, they seem to be trying to bypass the actual drug in order to figure out a way to get the desired effects without the 'high,' but for something that is only needed every 10 days, I wonder how detrimental it would be to an individual to take a dose of ketamine while they wind down for bed.

Also; my psychiatrist said 'no' already

You wonder how detrimental it would be to give a depressed person a hallucinogen?

Yes. I wonder how detrimental it would be to be high on ketamine for a couple of hours for 10 days of effective treatment of depression.

They don't specify the dosage outside of saying that it is 'low.' Having tried ketamine, a low dose (10-30mg), has similar effects to marijuana. Certainly no hallucinations. Medium to high doses (70-100mg) are needed to achieve disassociation/hallucinations. Get into the 200mg range and I imagine you're on the verge of being in complete disassociation and unable to move.

Since the 'doses' you listed fail dimensionally, everyone should be extremely skeptical about anything else you have to say on the matter, and I hope you take this out of the science forum.

This post was edited by Azrad on Feb 9 2013 09:29am

You're right, I didn't mention the method of ingestion which could be important. Intravenous or Intramuscular doses would be significantly different then oral or nasal administration. But never did I suggest just taking a bunch of ketamine to see what happens. I posted an article with findings from Yale that suggest Ketamine is a viable treatment for depression.

As for taking it out of the science forum, I truly didn't realize that psychiatry wasn't science. My bad.

This post was edited by MinzMLF on Feb 9 2013 09:46am

I was asking how they fail dimensionally, not for a definition.

I can google whatever I want to but it won't help me respond to a 2 word post.

Further, I wonder how any of this pertains to the original article.

They did not list doses outside of stating "low" which leaves me to speculate in order to respond to your original question.




Basically, all I am asking is what you think about the article and why it would be bad to be high for a couple of hours in order to treat 10 days of depression. Is this a political or religious topic? Should medical advancement not be included in discussion on science? I'm confused. Tell me how I can make the post more on topic.

The dosages you listed do not match dimensionally with the doses used in biochemistry.

Like I said, I did not include the method of administration nor did I include bodyweight/etc.

But I hardly see any of that as the point in the original post. Is this just an attempt to discredit a scientific discovery by derailing the parrot of said information? lol