August 08, 2026, 07:41:17 PM
Dyatlov Pass Forum

Author Topic: An experiment with psychostimulants that reportedly went very wrong  (Read 241 times)

1 Member and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Today at 05:12:34 AM
Reply #30
Offline

Topaze


Hi Ziljoe,

I've been thinking about it a bit, and I think that if it had been a romantic situation, they wouldn't have ALL fled the tent—only Yuri and maybe one other person would have run after her.
Oh, we can consider a whole bunch of psychological causes, such as: a power struggle between Dyatlov and Zolo that might have led to a fight in the tent, for example.

Hi GlennM

“I believe the thread is a red herring and an argument for the sake of arguing.”
Because your Wolverine theory is undoubtedly smarter, I suppose? A group of nine people scared of a 13-kilo creature—and a scavenger at that (it only eats carcasses)—come on, let’s be serious, LOL!

Hi Hunter

If we go with this theory, I, too, would tend to suspect Zolo the most, since he stands out from the other group members’ profiles, and as you’ve already pointed out, he may have been exposed to the Wehrmacht’s Pervitin and could therefore have picked up some bad habits. On the other hand, given his age, it’s plausible that he’s using it to boost his resistance to the cold and physical exertion.
 

Today at 07:46:51 AM
Reply #31
Online

Ziljoe


Hi topaze


It's me that mentioned the wolverine . The theory is more complicated than and quite elegant. Igor B puts a strong sequence of explanations that tie together reasonably well. It's more to with it spraying it's glands than physically fighting. It's a text book example of debate and logical sequence.

The suggestion of  Zina leaving the tent is a thought experiment. It is an example.

I lean towards weather conditions on the whole as that's where the evidence seems to point to.

Everything you suggest and I have suggested has been debated and there are good threads discussing it all.

Back to yours and the drugs. Is there any evidence.?
 

Today at 02:44:59 PM
Reply #32
Offline

Topaze


@GlennM
Sorry, I made a mistake about the wolverine story—I wrongly attributed it to you! In any case, that doesn’t change the meaning of my comment. No one HERE has anything but theories about this case, so it’s a little too easy to criticize other people’s theories!

@Ziljoe
So when it comes to the wolverine, it’s even more ridiculous to put your life on the line over some smell! Fart and/or putrid smell drive to death LOL!
No, there’s no evidence for the stimulant theory—it’s just an hypothesis, and I added it with “testing” so it would fit with a cover-up. My goal was to come up with an hypothesis that could fit with as many details as possible in this case!
 

Today at 04:36:45 PM
Reply #33
Online

GlennM


Topaz, thank you for the correction. Like all theories, your's has merit. Also, like all theories it is selective in what evidence supports it and whad additional speculation is employed to defend it. Nothing new there either. Ziljoe is the most fair-minded and impartial in investigator on this forum. It would be unwise to cross swords with him. You can certainly tilt your lance at me though.

I do not have any evidence pointing to psychoactive drug abuse, though I toyed with ergot poisoning in their bread. I can allow for amphetamine use if they could source it. The 50s and 60s were rife with drug experimentation. As I mentioned before, the tissue samples did not yield reports in the case files. Therefore, though you can actually prove nothing but make a strong argument for plausibility, it puts your idea in the same box as every other one, mine included!

If in time a revelation proves you right, you get to say I told you so. Until then please suffer our critiques and posts, because if we stop, the forum will be the worse for it.
We don't have to say everything that comes into our head.