First of all, drugs were as a whole nowhere near as potent as they are now. Secondly, I'm not sure I buy that from McCartney. I know he was a huge stoner during his Beatles tenure, but as for it actually helping him write songs...it's a nice story but probably not totally true.
Yea he is probably lying.Originally Posted by simonj
lol @ drugs are nowhere near as potent as they are now. Way to buy into the bullshit our governments spread. Drugs overall were much more potent back then actually, especially lsd etc. The only thing that has gone up in potency over the years has been weed but that's not to say they didn't have amazing weed back then. Back then they had amazing pure sativa's that were incredibly potent and had borderline psychedelic effects. Now the only way to get a high like that is to live somewhere like cali where you know what you are getting or grow it yourself. Now all of our drugs are cut to shit and half the problems associated with them come from people not knowing what they are getting or some nasty cut.
playing devils advocate, I believe he by potent he meant "dangerous due to the impure cuts of everything."
Thats how I read it anyway.
If that's what he meant then he is an idiot.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks