Sciencemadness Discussion Board - Ideas for new hallucinogens?

I know from personal and tertiary experience that it can induce vivid dreams at higher doses

[Edited on 2-15-2012 by AirCowPeaCock]

probably metabolites.

OP: Aren't you the kid asking us for information on what chemistry is and what molecules are, and here you are, trying to think of novel drugs?

Do us all a favor and stop posting this kind of info. You can look up Chris Nichols, as he is your man. Find his papers and read all of them, then return.

zoombafu - 15-2-2012 at 11:12

read pihkal and tihkal, there is a lot to be learned about developing psychoactive compounds.

Nicodem - 15-2-2012 at 11:31

I know from personal and tertiary experience that it can induce vivid dreams at higher doses

Do you mind describing its synthesis or at least provide the characterization data? You sure don't expect anyone is going to believe such unsubstantiated claims.

DrEntheogen - 15-2-2012 at 11:45

Quote: Originally posted by Nicodem

First of all, that is not the structure of leonorine. That compound is called leonurine and I would like to know why are you spreading this misinformation on the internet? What is the reference for your claims that this compound is a hallucinogen?
There are at least 24 scientific articles published in regard to the physiological or chemical aspects of this compound and not a single one mentions anything that would lead to a conclusion about any hallucinogenic properties. There are a few Chinese herbal drugs that contain it and these have been used for centuries, yet no reports about any hallucinogenic side effect!

You have miss understood what ive said. i said that its psychoactive, and if you re read my post im curious about what anyone would do to change/rearange the molecular structure to make it produce hallucinations. theirs no where that ive said it causes hallucinations. the reason for this thread is example THC is a mild verry mild at that hallucinogen, its psychoactive and it should be possible to rearange/change its structure so it could produce hallucinations, more euphoria etc. re read the post. theres no need to come at my neck, im only trying to start a discussion about things that are legal and can be made into a hallucinogen, empathogen/entactogen and stay legal. and your right about the spelling LEONURINE, but thats about all. i misspelled the name. and i also wanted anyone to post about this or anyother legal alkaloid, compound etc. that they think could be used to do the same thing.

DrEntheogen - 15-2-2012 at 11:52

and for the record i would never post nor tell anyone something that i wasnt 100% sure about and that i didnt have personal experience or a reference for.

Nicodem - 15-2-2012 at 12:08

Quote: Originally posted by DrEntheogen

You have miss understood what ive said. i said that its psychoactive

If you have a veritable reference, then post it already like you were told to do.

Quote:

the reason for this thread is example THC is a mild verry mild at that hallucinogen

THC as a very mild hallucinogen? You must be kidding. That one is among the most potent hallucinogens known to man, both by dosage and effect. Well, perhaps you just did not took enough?

Quote:

theres no need to come at my neck, im only trying to start a discussion about things that are legal and can be made into a hallucinogen, empathogen/entactogen and stay legal.

You want to start a discussion, yet I see no reference to any article worth discussing here. Instead you give us insignificant speculations about how legality is possibly connected with hallucinogenic properties of compounds. That is ridiculous. This is a chemistry forum and some of us take science seriously. So if you want to discuss the structure-activity relationship and receptor affinity of various types of hallucinogens, that is fine and your are welcome to do so as long as you cite sources, but if you want to discuss about unreferenced speculations, then you joined the wrong forum.

Rich_Insane - 15-2-2012 at 12:28

On the chemistry side of things, Dr. Nichols from Purdue has published a lot of interesting work. He designs ligands for the 5HT2A receptor by mapping out the binding site. In fact, many of his creations are becoming quite popular hallucinogens (25i-NBoMe series). They are very, very potent agonists for the 5HT2A receptors with binding affnities (Ki) in the nM range.

This here is an excellent lecture by Dr. Nichols: Advances in Understanding how Psychedelics Work in the Brain

There seem to be two pathways initiated by the serotonin 2A receptor. Nichols goes into detail, but basically there is the IPI3 pathway which is your standard inisitol cascade causing Ca2+ release from the ER and you've got this other strange arachidonic acid pathway.

It's fascinating how important this is to the effects of psychedelics, because at a molecular level the differences are made. One molecule may have a shape that twists and contorts the receptor in a way that activates the IPI3 pathway more than another. This is for one receptor. Years of work have been compiled on this single receptor (5HT2A). Other hallucinogenic receptors include the Kappa-opioid (Salvia divinorum and its terpenoids are agonists for this receptor), the NMDA receptor (dissociatives are antagonists), the sigma/trace-amine receptors (DMT, antidepressants and some dissociatives function on this receptor type) and many more. Alexander Shulgin and Nichols work by making minute modifications to the structure of molecules to determine the induced effect of said changes. As this is a (primarily) chemistry forum, I suppose you may be interested in that kind of work. The neurobiology is more complex and more murky because neurobiology must take into account all of these receptors and translate their activities into psychedelic and physiological effects.

Pulverulescent - 15-2-2012 at 12:33

Quote:

THC as a very mild hallucinogen? You must be kidding. That one is among the most potent hallucinogens known to man, both by dosage and effect.

I can't agree Nicodem ─ by itself, THC is quite mild by comparison to, say, LSD or psilocybin . . .
Some (fast-disappearing) low-latitude sativas are certainly hallucinogenic, but this is due to other relatively less investigated compounds such as THCV which potentiate THC's ability to produce hallucination!
I used to cultivate, years ago, sativas which would produce a 'trip' that would often be a helter skelter experience (sigh)!

P

Nicodem - 15-2-2012 at 12:59

Quote: Originally posted by Pulverulescent

Quote:

THC as a very mild hallucinogen? You must be kidding. That one is among the most potent hallucinogens known to man, both by dosage and effect.

I can't agree Nicodem ─ by itself, THC is quite mild by comparison to, say, LSD or psilocybin . . .

That is a bit hard to compare, because the main effect of LSD and psilocibin is a psychedelic experience while THC does not have any psychedelic effect (at least not to the majority of people). Besides, the hallucinations caused by LSD and psilocibin are mainly visual while THC causes primarily spatio-temporal hallucinations and closed eye visuals. Furthermore, THC impairs cognitive functions while LSD does not have much effect on cognitive abilities at bellow ego-dissolution dosages (though the psychedelic phenomena can be considered as a cognitive breakthrough, so this is debatable). THC is also a strong sedative, while LSD and psilocibin are not. So I think you chose a totally wrong class of hallucinogens to compare. THC can utmost be compared to some degree with NMDA blockers or even antimuscarincs.

Rich_Insane - 15-2-2012 at 12:59

Quote:

I can't agree Nicodem ─ by itself, THC is quite mild by comparison to, say, LSD or psilocybin . . . Some (fast-disappearing) low-latitude sativas are certainly hallucinogenic, but this is due to other relatively less investigated compounds such as THCV which potentiate THC's ability to produce hallucination! I used to cultivate, years ago, sativas which would produce a 'trip' that would often be a helter skelter experience (sigh)!

Cannabidiol is an agonist for the 5HT1A receptor. A lot of Western-Indicas (type 2/3, wide leaf) have high cannabidiol and cannabinol. Traditionally, they were used for hashish production in Northern India towards Pakistan, so they were not bred the same way as Type 1 (narrow leaf) Indicas and certain Sativas. Sativa plants have a lot of genetic diversity (they were the original C. sativa species), so there is so much variation in the cannabinoid partition.

But yea, THC elicits hallucinogenic effects in a different manner than psychedelics. It's more of a slowed release of neurotransmitters than actual receptor agonism. Although the pathway is still complex and poorly understood.

DrEntheogen - 15-2-2012 at 14:59

so mild hallucinogen could be considered correct, and ive deffinantley smoked enough, but im talking about actual visuals. and i joined this forum to converse, learn more, and eventualy help other people learn. you realy dont need to be so aggresive about things, im not giving false information and saying its true.

"Leonurine is one of the chemical constituents of the South African plant Leonotis leonurus. It is a mildly psychoactive alkaloid found in species Leonotis nepetifolia, Leonotis artemisia as well as other plants of family Lamiaceae. Leonurine is easily extracted into water, as well as from the essential oil of Leonurus sibiricus.[1" wikipedia.org

Okay mildly psychoactive, heres the ref. and ill make sure everything is referenced from now on.
and if you know so much which im sure you do, share your knowledge with me instead of trying to make me look like a fooll, i did nothing to you so theirs no reason to be llike that.

Pulverulescent - 16-2-2012 at 02:09

Quote:

Besides, the hallucinations caused by LSD and psilocibin are mainly visual while THC causes primarily spatio-temporal hallucinations and closed eye visuals.

Like when your hands become great mountains and you're looking down on them from a 'plane?

P

GreenD - 16-2-2012 at 08:44

I have just begun to read Dr.Nichol's work. At any rate - finding the binding site geometry from the substrate is a daunting task. Stereochemistry, rigidity, ortho-versus-para/meta substituents all play crucial roles. It was even proposed that identical compounds will have strongly different effects depending on their orientation in the receptor (seems obvious). He had pronounced some work in 2011 that was deemed too dangerous to be published - the activity of the compound he had created was so active in the brain he decided to keep the work unpublished, for fear of the black market. He has been known to feel responsible for many deaths from the use of drugs he has synthesized.

I've also picked up a book in the library from here - fundamentals of medicinal chemistry or something of the like. Very interesting. The Topliss graph is interesting as well, however I don't quite understand how they come up with it.

THC affects very different receptors, and its effects are to match - it is very hard to compare THC to LSD or DMT or Psilocybin/psilocin. Come to think of it - LSD is one of the most active psychoactives in terms of how many receptors it interacts with, which is one of the reasons it is "relateable" to most other compounds.
With that said, if you have ever had lack of sleep and smoked a great deal of THC I can assure you there is a good chance you will have a full blown hallucinatory experience. I've had two. I sat in my room, while high, coming down, and very, very tired. My entire room became the moon, and the lunar lander was right in front of me. Earth was in the distance. I had to focus for the image to stay, any eye movement quickly placed me back in my room.

I do not like THC very much. It's affinity to produce paranoia & delusional thoughts has steered me away from it. Its more medicinal effects (primarily from the compound CBD & CBN) do help me sleep and become lethargic when I feel anxious.

It is interesting, to me, to have read this:
NN-DMT is one of the most potent hallucinogens known, and MDMA is one of the most potent euphoria drugs, acting on receptors that release dopamine, etc. However, Methylenedioxy-nn-dimethyltryptamine has zero activity. Therefore, there is a very delicate issue of geometry, size, and sometimes even more importantly, solubility in the BBB.

[Edited on 16-2-2012 by GreenD]

AirCowPeaCock - 16-2-2012 at 09:58

Quote: Originally posted by Nicodem

I know from personal and tertiary experience that it can induce vivid dreams at higher doses

Do you mind describing its synthesis or at least provide the characterization data? You sure don't expect anyone is going to believe such unsubstantiated claims.

From wild-dagga (Leonotis leonurus), while its possible the effects produced were from another alkaloid--I doubt it.

DrEntheogen - 16-2-2012 at 11:03

Quote: Originally posted by GreenD

I have just begun to read Dr.Nichol's work. At any rate - finding the binding site geometry from the substrate is a daunting task. Stereochemistry, rigidity, ortho-versus-para/meta substituents all play crucial roles. It was even proposed that identical compounds will have strongly different effects depending on their orientation in the receptor (seems obvious). He had pronounced some work in 2011 that was deemed too dangerous to be published - the activity of the compound he had created was so active in the brain he decided to keep the work unpublished, for fear of the black market. He has been known to feel responsible for many deaths from the use of drugs he has synthesized.

I've also picked up a book in the library from here - fundamentals of medicinal chemistry or something of the like. Very interesting. The Topliss graph is interesting as well, however I don't quite understand how they come up with it.

THC affects very different receptors, and its effects are to match - it is very hard to compare THC to LSD or DMT or Psilocybin/psilocin. Come to think of it - LSD is one of the most active psychoactives in terms of how many receptors it interacts with, which is one of the reasons it is "relateable" to most other compounds.
With that said, if you have ever had lack of sleep and smoked a great deal of THC I can assure you there is a good chance you will have a full blown hallucinatory experience. I've had two. I sat in my room, while high, coming down, and very, very tired. My entire room became the moon, and the lunar lander was right in front of me. Earth was in the distance. I had to focus for the image to stay, any eye movement quickly placed me back in my room.

I do not like THC very much. It's affinity to produce paranoia & delusional thoughts has steered me away from it. Its more medicinal effects (primarily from the compound CBD & CBN) do help me sleep and become lethargic when I feel anxious.

It is interesting, to me, to have read this:
NN-DMT is one of the most potent hallucinogens known, and MDMA is one of the most potent euphoria drugs, acting on receptors that release dopamine, etc. However, Methylenedioxy-nn-dimethyltryptamine has zero activity. Therefore, there is a very delicate issue of geometry, size, and sometimes even more importantly, solubility in the BBB.

[Edited on 16-2-2012 by GreenD]

Wow, that is amazing about receptors and their being so much to consider, test, try, figure out. but its allso amazing knowing that we as humans are so complex. id love to have had what happened to you smoking some herb in your room and completley hallucinating happen to me, ive smoked for 10 years now and have never come close to that. im not doubting it i would just love to have an experience from marijuana similar to that.
Hallucinogens and empathogens/entactogens to me are for far more than to just feel good and have fun(even though that is a great part but you learn so much about yourself and everything around you. its just incredible.

Nicodem - 16-2-2012 at 12:40

Quote: Originally posted by DrEntheogen

so mild hallucinogen could be considered correct, and ive deffinantley smoked enough, but im talking about actual visuals.

The thread title is "Ideas for new hallucinogens?". Hallucinogens induce hallucinations. Hallucinations are not only visual. Humans have several other senses and perceptions as well. "Hallucinogens" is a term that encompass all kind of compounds that alter perception. Many type of compounds are hallucinogens, the psychedelics are just one of these types and hallucinogenesis is not even the main thing that makes them interesting to most people. The archetypal hallucinogens that fit the definition perfectly are the antimuscarinics, for example scopolamine. Leonurine certainly has nothing to do with this topic.

Quote:

and i joined this forum to converse, learn more, and eventualy help other people learn. you realy dont need to be so aggresive about things, im not giving false information and saying its true.

I'm always straightforward, or what you call aggressive, when new members try to ignore the fact that this forum is a science forum (just like its title implies). You might not perceive that you are giving false information, but you are. It is all a matter of your perception not being used to scientific scrutiny. You are reproducing a wikipedia myth based on a false reference. Have you checked if the wikipedia entry on Leonurine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonurine) is true? Have you verified if its only reference, the article Experientia, 35, 571–572, truly contains the information claimed in the wikipedia entry? Obviously you did not. If you would have read my previous replies with more attention you would have realized by now, from the discourse I used, that I'm already aware of that bogus wikipedia entry and I specifically asked you for a "veritable reference". Wikipedia is never a "veritable reference" until all its references are verified - it is an encyclopedia after all!

Quote:

and if you know so much which im sure you do, share your knowledge with me instead of trying to make me look like a fooll, i did nothing to you so theirs no reason to be llike that.

The best you can do to look like a fool is to open a referenceless thread and try to deviate the topic away from science on a science forum.

From wild-dagga (Leonotis leonurus), while its possible the effects produced were from another alkaloid--I doubt it.

What kind of a reply is that? First you claim that leonurine "can induce vivid dreams at higher doses" and now you involve a totally different material. How many times do I have to repeat that this is a scientific forum? You give no reference that Leonotis leonurus contains leonurine and make some parabole that this plant material equals some compound which is only present in some related Lamiaceae species. Furthermore, the actual plants that contain leonurine are not psychoactive (if they would be, it would be known as they are used as traditional medicine drugs). Besides, even a cursory look at the molecular structure should have been enough to realize that it is an N-alkylguanidine, thus not in accordance to the claims of Leonotis leonurus being smoked for attaining psychoactivity.

GreenD - 16-2-2012 at 18:16

Dr.Entheogen, please look up psychonaut.com - you would fit right in with that community.

(Or Dmtnexus.org - they have some very, very intelligent people on that site!)

497 - 17-2-2012 at 10:37

N-(substituted)benzyl compounds are the way of the future. How many more variations will have to be tried before the 0.3 mg active dose of 25I can be surpassed? What are the potential results of easy to produce (and relatively user friendly) hallucinogens that cost a fraction of a cent per dose? That reality has already arrived boys. Just in time...

Unlike LSD, NBOMe compounds can be made from extremely basic materials. How about optimizing an OTC synthesis rather than wasting your time trying to compete with the PhD's using supercomputers to develop novel compounds?

GreenD - 17-2-2012 at 17:34

extremely basic materials? where does one obtain brominated catechols?!

oh yeah chemistry.

still they don't look as easy as nn substituted tryptamines... decarboxylation, bromo-alkane, stir with some TEA or DIPEA... plus those nbome coompounds have, from what I've seen, caused quite some damage. Not very user friendly - although who the fuck knows what people are actually getting now days.

"I took some acid it lasted 48 hours and tasted bitter."

White Yeti - 17-2-2012 at 18:42

The most potent natural hallucinogen is Salvinorin A.
Found in Salvia divinorum is active in doses as low as 200 micrograms according to wikipedia. I am personally against the legalisation of marijuana, but I think other hallucinogens should be made legal. There are so many hallucinogens in nature already, if you know which plants to pick and which mushrooms to bring home. Regulations just favour the manufacture of hallucinogens in the lab with precursors that make your limbs fall off (ergotamine).

I'm surprised that no one mentioned this hallucinogen before.

564px-Salvinorin_A_structure.svg.png - 29kB

[edit]
I'm not sure why the picture is blacked out, but clicking on it displays the structural formula of this substance.

[Edited on 2-18-2012 by White Yeti]

497 - 18-2-2012 at 08:00

No GreenD you are wrong. NBOMe compounds that I have experience with are definitely more user friendly than 2Cs and has a shorter duration. In fact, so far they have achieved a better ratio of good reviews:bad reviews than most compounds. You're thinking of things like bromodragonfly, which is a whole different ballgame. NBOMes are not the first superpotent phenethylamines, but they are the first ones to actually be usable. Their safety profile has been shown to be far greater than things like bromodragonfly or DOI. Still can't match LSDs safety margin, so yes there is some potential danger if dumbasses sell it as LSD. For now, I believe other compounds are far more commonly sold as "acid" simply because NBOMes are not widely known/available yet.

Tryptamines are worth exploring for sure, but things that are 2 orders of magnitude more potent seem worthwhile too...

Yes, salvinorin is quite potent... but that's about all it has going for it. It's effects were surely quite impressive, but not something people often want to repeat. And calling it a hallucinogen is a little generous, dissociative would be more appropriate in my experience.

[Edited on 18-2-2012 by 497]

[Edited on 18-2-2012 by 497]

Nicodem - 18-2-2012 at 11:21

Yes, salvinorin is quite potent... but that's about all it has going for it. It's effects were surely quite impressive, but not something people often want to repeat. And calling it a hallucinogen is a little generous, dissociative would be more appropriate in my experience.

Seems like nobody here actually knows or checked what the term "hallucinogen" means. As this misinterpretation keeps on going on here even after I explained it already, I will go as far as to cite the dictionary:

Quote:

hal·lu·ci·no·gen
[huh-loo-suh-nuh-juhn]
noun
a substance that produces hallucinations.

hal·lu·ci·na·tion
[huh-loo-suh-ney-shuhn]
noun
1. a sensory experience of something that does not exist outside the mind, caused by various physical and mental disorders, or by reaction to certain toxic substances, and usually manifested as visual or auditory images.
2. the sensation caused by a hallucinatory condition or the object or scene visualized.
3. a false notion, belief, or impression; illusion; delusion.

As you can see, dissociatives fit the definition perfectly. Actually, dissociatives, either NMDA blockers or kappa receptor antagonists, and also cannabinoids and antimuscarinics are more aligned with the above definition than psychedelics, especially in consideration to the the point 3 of the definition of the term "hallucination".
It is not really that common to have realistic hallucinations encompassing also delusions on psychedelics even at the doses where the effects are already heavily "manifested as visual or auditory images". Of course, the interpretation of the experience can lead one into accepting some perceptions and impression as more or less realistic, but this depends more on the individual neurotic background rather than the effect of the drug on the mind. Even though delusions can be achieved on psychedelics at above ego-dissolution levels, they are not really a typical component of the psychedelic phenomenon.
On the other hand, those that have experience with scopolamine and similar compounds know very well what a real hallucinogen is. Even at mild doses of antimuscarinics, delusions are inevitable and what is "manifested as visual or auditory images" is often indiscernible from reality, at which point reality becomes a joke you play to yourself. LSD is a walk in the park in comparison to scopolamine when it comes to which is a more efficient hallucinogen. When it comes to the real stuff, you will not be talking about aesthetically beautiful kaleidoscopic images and arabesques, like you would be talking about some nice psychedelic. With scopolamine it is a nightmare come true. A correct dose salvinorine is like a disintegration into atoms. A heavy dose of THC can be madness and paranoia at its best. Psychedelics most certainly are hallucinogens, but they pale in comparison to the more effective ones.

This thread is becoming desperately useless and is still more or less referenceless, so to bring it back to science I have actually taken the time to check the literature in regard to Leonotis leonorum. The plant has been quite well studied in regard to its constituents, but as far as I could find, the psychoactive constituent is not yet known. The aerial plant material is rich in labdane diterpenoids. The major diterpenoid constituent is marrubiin which is otherwise better known as a constituent of Marrubium vulgare. Two new labdanes have been determined just recently, 9,13-epoxy-6-hydroxylabdan-16,15-olide and 9,13:15,16-diepoxy-6,16-labdanediol (Biochemical Systematics and Ecology 2011, 39, 216-219). Long chain terpenoids have also been isolated, such as 1,2,3-trihydroxy-3,7,11,15-tetramethylhexadecan-1-yl-palmitate and others (Phytochemistry Letters 2009, 2, 103-105). Some flavonoids have also been found in aerial parts of the plant (Pharmaceutical Biology 2009, 47, 894-902). The review on the furan-diterpenoids from the genera Leonotis and Leonurus (Heterocycles (2007), 74, 31-52) covers the references up to the year 2006. Bellow is the graphical excerpt of the structures of some diterpenoids in L. leonorum. These compounds are structurally related to salvinorins, but don't get mislead by this - affinity to the kappa receptors is extremely sensitive to structural modifications of salvinorin A, and thus structural similarity mean absolutely nothing.

White Yeti - 18-2-2012 at 11:54

Well, if the OP wants to get his hands on a legal hallucinogen:
Nutmeg anyone?
You only need to steam distil a couple of kilos of raw nutmeg, but it's legal, not a very pleasant trip mind you, but legal nonetheless.
What's the point of synthesising new hallucinogens if there are so many of them in nature already? You just have to know where to look. Now, don't get me wrong, these substances have limited uses in therapy, but let's be honest, I don't think any of you are going to use them to treat mental disorders.
Did you guys know that even lime trees contain substances that cross the blood brain barrier? Not hallucinogenic per se, but still relevant.

Nicodem - 18-2-2012 at 12:04

Well, if the OP wants to get his hands on a legal hallucinogen:
Nutmeg anyone?

There is no evidence whatsoever that myristicin is psychoactive, while there are some inconclusive evidence on the contrary. Again we are speculating, are we?

https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/viewthread.php?tid=79...
https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/viewthread.php?tid=16...
https://www.sciencemadness.org/whisper/viewthread.php?tid=11...

White Yeti - 18-2-2012 at 12:31

Quote: Originally posted by Nicodem

There is no evidence whatsoever that myristicin is psychoactive, while there are some inconclusive evidence on the contrary. Again we are speculating, are we?

Technically, research shows that myristicin acts in tandem with elemicin, hence why you can't get a trip by taking one without the other. You need to actually take the ground nutmeg, which contains both.

This also shows that the biochemistry and metabolism of psychoactive substances may be quite complex. I've never tried nutmeg myself, nor do I plan on it, but apparently nutmeg can have one hell of an effect. If you want to classify hallucinogens very narrowly, go right ahead, but nutmeg and all its components is definitely hallucinogenic.

Nicodem - 18-2-2012 at 12:49

In tandem for what activity? What is the reference of this research?

Quote:

This also shows that the biochemistry and metabolism of psychoactive substances may be quite complex.

It only shows the speculation often gets in front of science.

Quote:

I've never tried nutmeg myself, nor do I plan on it, but apparently nutmeg can have one hell of an effect. If you want to classify hallucinogens very narrowly, go right ahead, but nutmeg and all its components is definitely hallucinogenic.

Oh yes, nutmeg definitively is a hallucinogen, but what you say is that myristicin, and now also that elemicin, are hallucinogenic, for which you give no reference. This is nothing but another myth being reproduced again and again. Besides, all of nutmegs components most certainly are not hallucinogenic, as this would be complete nonsense. So, where is the experimental evidence that the stem volatile fraction of nutmeg or mace is psychoactive? Instead, there is experimental evidence that the psychoactive component(s) of nutmeg might be in the lipidic fraction:

Quote:

A ligroin extract of nutmeg (Myristica fragrans) caused
a significant increase in the duration of light and deep
sleep in the young chicken. The presence of trimyristin
tended to increase the effect of the extract. The extract
did not contain detectable amounts of myristicin, elemicin,
safrole, or eugenol, which either individually or collectively
have been suggested to be the active agent of nutmeg.

abstract of J. Ethnopharmacol 1982, 6, 61-66.

Edit: ...and some more

Quote:

Myristicin, or methoxysafrole, is the principal aromatic
constituent of the volatile oil of nutmeg, the dried ripe
seed of Myristica fragrans. Myristicin is also found in
several members of the carrot family (Umbelliferae). Several
intoxications have been reported after an ingestion of
approximately 5 g of nutmeg, corresponding to 1-2 mg myristicin/
kg body weight (b.w.). Although these intoxications may
be ascribed to the actions of myristicin, it is likely
that other components of nutmeg may also be involved. The
metabolism of myristicin resembles that of safrole. No
information is available, however, concerning the quantitative
importance of the different metabolic pathways. The acute
toxicity of myristicin appears to be low. No toxic effects
were observed in rats administered myristicin perorally
at a dose of 10 mg/kg b.w., while 6-7 mg/kg b.w. may be
enough to cause psychopharmacological effects in man. A
weak DNA-binding capacity has been demonstrated, but there
are no indications that myristicin exerts carcinogenic
activity in short-term assays using mice. Intake estimations
indicate that nonalcoholic drinks may be the most important
single source of myristicin intake. Based on available
data, it seems unlikely that the intake of myristicin from
essential oils and spices in food, estimated to a few mg
per person and day in this report, would cause adverse
effects in humans. It is, however, at present not possible
to make a complete risk assessment, as studies regarding
genotoxicity and chronic toxicity, including reproductive
toxicity and carcinogenicity, are still lacking.

abstract of Nat. Toxins 1997, 5, 186-192.

It appears the whole idea of certain allylbenzenes being the active constituents of nutmeg comes from Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. Engl. 1971, 10, 370-374. The author claims that myristicin was found to be psychoactive in man by pointing to a reference from 1829! Yeah right, they sure got it isolated and characterized at that time. It seems to me that most of these conclusions are based on earlier Shulgin's speculations on possible matabolic pathways for myristicin and elimicin as published in Nature 1966, 210, 380-384. While these hypotheses were totally legitimate, some authors took them to be more than hypotheses (just another case of unfamiliarity with the scientific method).

... I just realized that I already posted these same abstracts already in the nutmeg thread. Strange how these myths keep on resurfacing all the time.

[Edited on 18/2/2012 by Nicodem]

turd - 19-2-2012 at 00:49

What's the point of synthesising new hallucinogens if there are so many of them in nature already?

Because

Most of us are chemists not botanists
It's easier to replace methyl iodide with ethyl bromide than to genetically modify plants
It's sometimes easier to synthesize decent amounts than to extract tons of plant material
Synthetic material often has more favourable purity
Many excellent materials are (semi-)synthetic and not found in nature (LSD, 2C-B, MDMA)
Total synthesis is cool
We can

To salvage this thread I propose to close it and to reopen it under "Ideas for new psychedelics", since that seems to be the intent of the original poster. I doubt that he's in search for novel deliriants and/or has the methods to test them.

GreenD - 20-2-2012 at 07:24

Interesting note; apparently by the odd wording of legal speak in USA, "magic truffles" are legal because they do not hit the sun. The law states that any fungus with a mushroom cap that is psychoactive (psilocybin/psilocin) is illegal, however - truffles grow below ground.

This is pure heresay, but I think it is true, from what I've read.

@ Turd & #6 - Have you eve tried 2C-B? Or 2C-I for that matter? Very high risk of psychosis/paranoia, etc. Not a user-friendly drug, even to the trained "eye".

I will go ahead and open the new thread.

>Ideas for new Hallucinogens<

GreenD - 20-2-2012 at 07:43

Firstly, the SAR (Structure to Activity Relationship) of psychedelic compounds is very hard to quantify. Many drugs have been tested on mice with modification to an existing hallucinogen. (See Shulgin, David Nichols). This is a summary of what I know - realize that much of this information varies from receptor to receptor, compound to compound. I mostly look at tryptamines.

•Often times, increasing the length of the N,N-Dialkyl chains in tryptamines gives rise to two different phenomena:

1.N,N-dimethyl tryptamines or even some NN-dimethyl-methoxycatechols (other name?) show greatest activity, while increasing the n-alkyl chain length reduces activity.
2.N,N-dimethyl tryptamines/methoxycatechols can be inactive or very low activity, yet increasing the n-alkyl chains to propyl groups gives maximum activity, and drops off at butyl & beyond.

1&2 are obviously converse to each other, and show that the entire size of the molecule is very important to whether it can easily "fit" into the appropriate receptor.

•Adding hydrophilic groups to a molecule can often cause the molecule to become too polar to cross the BBB even though the additions or substitutions to the parent molecules would most likely increase activity.

•Bioavailability is important; Although it is well known that psilocybin is psychoactive, it is suspected that psilocybin's activity can only be attributed to the hydrolysis to psilocin. It has also been well known that DMT cannot be taken orally, due to MAO activity (which can be surpressed by MAOi). Bioavailibility can also be witnessed first hand by the length of time before onset; A longer onset can allude to a longer metabolite pathway to the active drug, while drugs that have immediate onset are often thought of as being active in their administered structure.

I will have much more to add later on. Useful information would be on
•NBOMe drugs, which I know little to nothing about
•Effects of Nootropics (usually simply add blood flow to brain?)
•Effects of cannabinoids & information on cannibinoid receptors.
•Phenethylamine's SAR.
•The activity of halogen-derivatives to parent molecules.
•NOMENCLATURE for this kind of stuff!

[Edited on 20-2-2012 by GreenD]

497 - 20-2-2012 at 09:04

Have you tried them? Where are you getting your information? The above statement is basically implying large parts of pikhal are bullshit. Have you even read pikhal? I in fact have experienced a variety of 2Cs and have been around quite a large number of people on them. Almost always good reviews. Some physical effects such as nausea, but they are rarely a big problem. And why exactly do we need two threads named the same? Are you on drugs right now?

GreenD - 20-2-2012 at 09:10

Have you tried them? Where are you getting your information? The above statement is basically implying large parts of pikhal are bullshit. Have you even read pikhal? I in fact have experienced a variety of 2Cs and have been around quite a large number of people on them. Almost always good reviews. Some physical effects such as nausea, but they are rarely a big problem. And why exactly do we need two threads named the same? Are you on drugs right now?

When am I not on drugs is a better question.

I am a regular @ Psychonaut.com and frequently there are threads of "2C-x bad trip help!". Some of the users are experienced, some are not. Often they sound a bit uneducated in the realm of psychedelia - more for the "entertainment" part of psychodelics, but never the less it is one of the most common on the board to report bad trips / long after effects (migraines, paranoia, dissociation).

It may be also due to the drugs potency, I am not sure. But that is where I base my information from.

I saw the same thing with the synthetic marijuana stuff. People take them for a while, but at some point hit a psychotic break point at which point they report having no clue of why it happened, as the setting was similar to previous attempts, as well as "set" (although subjective).

Reading PIHKAL, trying them yourself, and reading an international forum on the matter, they are all necessary to educate. As you can imagine, drugs effect people differently, and there is likely to always be some person who has an extraordinarily different experience to the substance. From my history on the site, these 2C-x compounds seem to give the greatest probability for stress on the user.

@ Nicdodem:

User reports are essential to this type of thread, since none of us are going to be able to have a population study of greater than (Us + friends + guinea pig) with this type of subject. We also, I would assume, do not have access to neuronal simulations or in-vivo testing, so I see no problem with anecdotal evidence here from a large population (International board).

Some subjects need to be a bit more subjective than organic chemistry analysis is used to. Sorry

[Edited on 20-2-2012 by GreenD]

[Edited on 20-2-2012 by GreenD]

Nicodem - 20-2-2012 at 10:09

This forum is not "Psychonaut.com" or whatever else, so stop derailing topics onto personal questions of intimate nature. Ask personal questions via the U2U like every civilized member does. And don't open any more threads with the same title unless you have something new to discuss, or a literature review for discussion, or if you have the ability to bring the discussion to an improved level.

497 - 20-2-2012 at 13:44

There is a large difference between freaking out on a drug because you're not ready for its effects (or side effects) and having psychosis. Also consider that 2Cs are probably the most commonly used powerfully hallucinogenic research chemical, along with some cannabinoids. Just because more people show up on a forum freaking out does not mean it is actually more likely to happen. Why do you think they have been so popular for so many years? Most powerful chems like 2Cs will cause such reactions if they're sold to some kid in a club as extacy... So I have to modify my earlier statement to, they are relatively user friendly at moderate doses in the appropriate setting.

That said, their NBOMe cousins are much better in many ways, and will replace them soon enough. 2Cs would only be preferable if you were looking for a heavier body high and/or much more physical impairment.

I doubt anyone here is going to spoonfeed you the information you asked for. It is all available. Learn how to research.

[Edited on 20-2-2012 by 497]

White Yeti - 20-2-2012 at 14:55

Because
Most of us are chemists not botanists

No reason to shun out botany, there are many powerful substances that are found in nature. If seeds fall in the right hands, things happen.

It's sometimes easier to synthesize decent amounts than to extract tons of plant material

The only benefit of this is if you are intending to sell the stuff, and thus engage in criminal activity. The doses needed for a trip are so small that I'd actually argue the opposite.

Synthetic material often has more favourable purity

Oh really, I'd rather have impurities that are derived from plants as opposed to carcinogenic and toxic precursors used for total synthesis.

Many excellent materials are (semi-)synthetic and not found in nature (LSD, 2C-B, MDMA)

Definately synthetic, but safe? Very little studies have been conducted on the potential effects of these substances. At least medical drugs are first tested and approved by the FDA before hitting the market. Albeit, the FDA is very corrupt nowadays, but it's still better than nothing.

turd - 20-2-2012 at 14:57

Huh?

The psychedelic effects of 2C-B on normal doses are much more benign than that of LSD or even psylocybin. For multiple reasons, the most important being a relatively short duration and a general positive energetic "push" and easy come-down. Sure, on high doses you may freak out, but this is nothing compared to the mental turmoil of a bad LSD trip.

I'd say that 15-20 mg 2C-B is perfect beginner material and I would heartily recommend it to an interested person. Some people may not like it due to the inability to handle the energy, but it will not be a terrible experience - just go out and look at things.

Naive persons will find it hilarious (as is the case for most people on their first LSD peak - but there it is much more risky to end in an annoying and long come down).

Anyway, this thread has steered way off topic - let's discuss novel drugs. This is not the right place to discuss well known psychedelics.

turd - 20-2-2012 at 15:31

No reason to shun out botany, there are many powerful substances that are found in nature. If seeds fall in the right hands, things happen.

What are you talking about? Nobody is stopping you posting on botany. I'll be thrilled to read your results. But please action and no mental masturbation.

Quote:

Oh really, I'd rather have impurities that are derived from plants as opposed to carcinogenic and toxic precursors used for total synthesis.

Highly irrational, given that the some of the most potent poisons and carcinogens come from plant and animal origins.

Quote:

Definately synthetic, but safe? Very little studies have been conducted on the potential effects of these substances.

Are you out of your mind? LSD must be one of the best studied psychotropic substances ever. Do you even realize how many people have taken and do take MDMA?

I don't want to be offensive, but you have shown so much ignorance in this thread that I refuse to further discuss the topic with you. Have a nice day.

White Yeti - 20-2-2012 at 15:54

I apologise for my ignorance. After all, I don't take any of these substances nor do I intend to. I cannot discuss any of the effects or side effects, synthesis and so forth.

However, when I was talking about substances that have not been thoroughly studied, I was referring to the 2C psychedelics.

Results: I have found a plant in my back yard that contains DMT. But, it also contains a neurotoxin. As I have no intention of using it, I don't really care, it's just a trophy for now.

Botanists, not unlike chemists, also like to do stuff just for the hell of it. Chemists like to synthesise, botanists like to find plants. Growers pay us good money for seeds and spores

497 - 20-2-2012 at 16:06

How's this for on topic?

Quote:

I've had about 12 trips (1 per month) all with mixing 25i-nbome with 300mg of mescaline hcl. The mescaline is divided into 3 seperate 100mg doses taken 1/2 hour apart (to effectively minimize any mescaline nausea to near zero). The hydroxy-propyl-beta-cyclodextrin complexed 525ug (micrograms) of 25i is taken right after dropping the second of the mescaline doses. The cyclodextrin complexed 25i is held under tongue for 20 minutes achieving 95% absorption (the entire tongue goes numb within 10 minutes of being placed under tongue). This is the only way I take 25i (with low dose mescaline)...as the combination trip effectively substitutes for real LSD, I had been taking acid for well over a decade, and both of us are unable to tell the difference between a mescaline/25i combination trip and real acid, the combination is that good....The mescaline is in fact "needed" due to it's 5-HT1A and 5-HT1E agonism.

The 5-HT1 receptors make up the majority of 5-HT receptors in the brain. The trip becomes 100% mind-manifesting and extremely visual/audial/spiritual. High spiritual mind states, memory access, full-blow artistic appreciation, complex archaic imagery, closed eye brightly neon colored scenes of foreign lands, architecture, art, you name it are seen in all their majestic beauty. Unfortunately, like many man-made psychedelics, 25i does not antogonize any of the 5-HT1 receptors, but with the addition of the mescaline, you get the full receptor "melt-down", "serotonin-firing" is turned off by 5-HT1 receptor activation, which is extremely important in a mind-manifesting psychedelic trip, the trip also becomes very laid-back, meditative, highly spiritual, deeply philosophical & insightful, but most of all incredible and hyper-dimensional with the addition of the mescaline, never overlook the importance of 5-HT1 agonism.

These combo's are not recommended unless you have lots of experience on taking each of the components on their own individually for quite some time, to gauge a feel for the proper dosage of each. 5-HT1 agonism provided by the mescaline (or other 5-HT1 agonist) also lowers blood pressure and serves to counteract the 5-HT2A stimulating agonism from the 25i, yin & yang for a balanced physical state as well. All of the natural God/nature made psychedelics like Mescaline, psilocybin and the semi-synthetic LSD agonize the 5-HT1 receptors with much more strength then they do the 5-HT2A & 5-HT2C receptors, that's how important they are to the trip.

Thomas Ray's paper is a fairly good resource for psychedelic receptor data, good way to hunt down other 5-HT1 agonist if mescaline is not available:

http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.... hxxp://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0009019

Other compounds that would work in place of mescaline to hit lots of the 5-HT1 receptors and even the transcendental 5-HT7 (5-HT6 hit by 25i is quite similar) receptor are:

5-MEO-DMT 5-MEO-MIPT 4-ACO-DIPT

However, many of the above compounds are illegal in many countries

other options:

4-ACO-DMT (looks like a great candidate in very low dose, else make this dose larger and 25i dose very low)

etc.

In countries where the above are not illegal? should really consider theoretically taking advantage of adding some potent low-dose 5-HT1 agonist into the 25i-nbome mix, this difference is like night and day, it is sooooo much better, if you love LSD trips (100% mind manifesting) you will love combining the nbome with 5-HT1 agonist, LSD also hits a large amount of the 5-HT1 receptors, see below.

4.00=maximum affinity for the receptor site:

5-MeO-DMT: 4.00 5ht1a, 3.69 5ht7, 3.48 5ht1d, 2.73 5ht6, 2.41 5ht1b, 2.38 D1, 1.84 5ht5a, 1.72 5ht1e, 1.58 D3, 1.57 Alpha2C, 1.55 5ht2c, 1.00 Alpha2A, 0.98 5ht2a, 0.97 SERT, 0.88 Imidazoline1, 0.86 Alpha2B, 0.82 NET, 0.78 D4, 0.73 D2, 0.69 5ht2b; 0.00: Alpha1B, Beta2, Beta1, DAT, D5, Alpha1A, Sigma1, Sigma2, CB2, KOR, Ca+Channel, M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, H2, CB1; ND: H1, DOR, MOR, NMDA -----------------Mescaline: 4.00 Alpha2C, 3.97 5ht2b, 3.61 5ht1a, 3.44 Imidazoline1, 3.16 5ht1e, 2.92 Alpha2A; 0.00: 5ht2a, 5ht2c, 5ht6, 5ht1d, D1, D2, D3, D4, D5, Alpha1A, Alpha1B, 5ht5a, Alpha2B, 5ht7, Beta1, Beta2, SERT, DAT, NET, 5ht1b, Sigma1, Sigma2, DOR, KOR, MOR, M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, H1, H2, CB2, CB1, Ca+Channel, NMDA -------------------Psilocin: 4.00 5ht2b, 3.40 5ht1d, 3.37 D1, 3.03 5ht1e, 2.88 5ht1a, 2.83 5ht5a, 2.82 5ht7, 2.82 5ht6, 2.67 D3, 2.52 5ht2c, 2.19 5ht1b, 2.14 5ht2a, 1.77 Imidazoline1, 1.74 SERT, 1.57 Alpha2B, 1.36 Alpha2A, 1.03 Alpha2C; 0.00: D2, Alpha1B, D5, D4, Beta2, Beta1, DAT, NET, Alpha1A, Sigma1, Sigma2, DOR, KOR, MOR, M1, M2, M3, M4, Ca+Channel, H1, H2, CB2, CB1; ND: M5, NMDA ---------------------5-MeO-MIPT: 4.00 5ht1a, 3.79 5ht7, 3.74 5ht1d, 3.32 5ht2b, 2.98 5ht6, 2.85 Alpha2A, 2.61 5ht1b, 2.44 5ht2a, 2.29 Alpha2C, 2.15 Imidazoline1, 2.13 Sigma2, 2.11 5ht5a, 1.86 Alpha2B, 1.75 5ht2c, 1.70 D3, 1.55 5ht1e, 1.41 H1, 1.29 D4, 1.28 SERT; 0.00: D2, Alpha1B, D5, D1, Beta2, NET, DAT, Sigma1, Beta1, DOR, KOR, MOR, M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, Alpha1A, H2, CB2, NMDA, Ca+Channel; ND: CB1 ---------------------DIPT: 4.00 5ht1a, 3.53 Imidazoline1, 3.48 5ht2b, 2.98 SERT, 2.83 Sigma1, 2.68 Alpha2C, 2.65 Sigma2, 2.62 Alpha2B, 2.56 D3, 2.55 5ht7, 2.53 H1, 2.51 5ht1d; 0.00: 5ht2a, D4, 5ht5a, D1, D2, Alpha2A, 5ht6, D5, Beta1, Beta2, 5ht2c, DAT, NET, 5ht1b, Alpha1B, 5ht1e, DOR, KOR, MOR, M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, Alpha1A, H2, CB2, CB1, Ca+Channel, NMDA ----------------------LSD: 4.00 5ht1b, 3.77 5ht7, 3.75 5ht6, 3.73 5ht1a, 3.70 5ht1d, 3.64 5ht5a, 3.54 5ht2a, 3.16 D3, 3.11 5ht2b, 3.11 5ht2c, 2.93 Alpha2A, 2.62 5ht1e, 2.55 D2, 2.39 D4, 2.34 D1, 2.05 D5, 1.54 Alpha1A, 1.40 H1, 1.39 Beta1, 1.05 Beta2, 0.65 Alpha1B; 0.00: KOR, DOR, DAT, SERT, MOR, NET; ND: Sigma2, Alpha2B, Alpha2C, Imidazoline1, M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, Sigma1, H2, CB2, CB1, Ca+Channel, NMDA -----------------------For example:

25i-nbome agonizes the following receptors [the lower the number, the greater the affinity] 5-HT2A (0.044), 5-HT2C (2), 5-HT6 (73), 5-HT2B (231), u opiate (82), kappa opiate [288]

mescaline agonizes the following receptors [4.00 = maximum affinity, 0.00 = no affinity]: Alpha2c (4.00), 5-HT2B (3.97), 5-HT1A (3.61) Imidazoline1 (3.44), 5-HT1E (3.16), alpha 2a (2.92)

therefore, mescaline + 25i looks like:

5-HT2A, Alpha2c, 5-HT2B, 5-HT2C, 5-HT1A, 5-HT1E, 5-HT6, u opiate, kappa opiate, Imidazoline1, alpha2a.

*** Also note that 25i-nbome is the most potent 5-HT2A agonist discovered, 5-HT2A agonism while being highly visual & holding high behavioral & empathogenic characteristics, also causes a bit of low level stimulation & raises blood pressure, 5-HT1 agonism on the other hand lowers blood pressure and has a meditative, serene, tranquil, calming quality, so combining the two serves a yin & yang purpose, to balance each other out. I would never combine 25i with LSD because LSD is allready a very potent 5-HT2A & 5-HT2C receptor agonist. 25i is 100 times more potent at the 5-HT2A site than even LSD! This was shown by Nichols in his paper on 25i.

4-aco-dmt sounds like it will fully replace mescaline in combination with 25i, so long of course as the 4-aco-dmt dose is kept moderate in comparison to an added in very low dose of 25i, this ensures that all the 5-HT1 receptors are hit with more strength then the 5-HT2A & 5-HT2C are hit, ensuring that it will give psychedelic effects just like LSD, LSD also hits 5-HT1 and 5-HT7 and 5 other receptors with way more strength than 5-HT2A & 5-HT2C are hit, this ensures a mind-manifesting trip that is the opposite of an "in your face" trip which so often occurs with many synthetic man-made psychedelics like DOC, DOI, DOM, 2-CE, etc. which way overstress 5-HT2A & 5-HT2C over anything else, this in turn can cause lack of spiritual insight, too much body load, too much and run-away stimulation in comparison to sedating tranquil qualities, difficult trips, etc.

25i-nbome recaptures the overflowing empathy and euphoric qualities of LSD to a "T", i've used it enough times to know this for sure, this quality was also found to be inherent to 25i by Erny as well, the good humor, the overflowing empathy, this is the shared mindspace between 25i and LSD, it is a trait of high 5-HT2A & 5-HTC agonism, 5-HT2A & 5-HT2C agonism is also responsible for in depth behavioral qualities along with visual presentation. Adding this into the tryptamine trip (keep tryptamine dose high so that it is not "over-ridden" with 5-HT2A/HT2C agonims from 25i, keep in balance!) at a very very low dose, should serve to accentuate the empathetic, behavioral and visual qualites of any psychedelic trip, analogous to the overflowing joy-ous empathogenic LSD trip. So keep the tryptamine dose high (or mescaline dose for that matter if being used) yet add back in "just a touch of love" from the 25i with a very very low dose.

Credit goes to tregar over at bluelight for that beautiful piece of knowledge. He has full trip reports posted too if you search. I suspect things like escaline might be the best legal alternative for combining with 25i. I am assuming the receptor binding would be very similar to mescaline? Does anyone have the numbers for escaline/proscaline?

Quote:

The only benefit of this is if you are intending to sell the stuff, and thus engage in criminal activity.

Can you please show me where it says the sale of all potentially psychoactive synthetic compounds is breaking the law?

[Edited on 21-2-2012 by 497]

White Yeti - 20-2-2012 at 18:49

Can you please show me where it says the sale of all potentially psychoactive synthetic compounds is breaking the law?

Do you have a DEA licence? I didn't think so. You do not mention your location so I will assume that you live in the US. After all, it is the most important country in the world. Here are the rules of the game when you live in the United States of America:
Schedule 1

For a more general view:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinogens#Legal_status_and_...

LSD, the most used psychedelic is illegal to own, synthesise or sell in the US of A:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LSD#United_States
As a random tidbit, the illegality of 5-methoxy-diisopropyltryptamine:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5-MeO-DIPT#Legality

I can go on forever, but I'll stop here because I'm tired and I have better things to do than be your secretary. Just use the damn search engine.

497 - 20-2-2012 at 19:16

Man read my words. Did I ask "are there any illegal synthetic chemicals?"

No... I asked you if anywhere it said ALL synthetic hallucinogens were illegal.

Neil - 21-2-2012 at 07:20

Man read my words. Did I ask "are there any illegal synthetic chemicals?"

No... I asked you if anywhere it said ALL synthetic hallucinogens were illegal.

Only the ones they've gotten round to banning

GreenD - 21-2-2012 at 07:56

497 - Wonderful find. Besides the reasoning behind taking the drugs (which is going to vary from person to person, yeti - and since you have no interest in taking these substances, why are you here?) it is very important to understand why they work and why they don't. Just because something is illegal does not mean it shouldn't be done.

"Any fool can make a rule... and any fool will mind it"

497 - I was further planning on spoon feeding myself the information I requested. I am currently reading Nichols et al paper on their findings of nbome compounds. I laughed when he specifically stated (twice) that he will NOT explain how he made the chemicals, in the experimental section

. It is very interesting the progression I have seen in his work, from blindly (more or less) mapping out receptors, to the ability to find binding sites via mutations in genes. Although it is probably beyond the scope of anyone here to need to know this, they found that the aromatic n-benzyl group of the recent discoveries interacts directly with an aromatic amino acid within a protein at the receptor. In mutating the protein via the respective gene, they found that mutations from some of the central aromatic amino acids dramatically decreased the response of 25I and analogues. That is all I've gotten to so far - more to come of course.

AirCowPeaCock - 21-2-2012 at 08:30

The analogs act could theoretically make possession of any psychoactive substance illegal to any one person. However it does not make a substance illicit. So legal psychedelic is somewhat of an oxymoron and somewhat of a good idea. Regardless if I cop knows you're doing it they're going to arrest you anyway. If the court decides your substance doesn't fall under the analogs act--good luck getting anything they took back. Now exploiting Freedom of religion is a different case. Many DMT (and analogous compound) containing plants or non-illicit and not controlled (that doesn't mean you can't be charged with possession of their compounds if use is determined not to be spiritual). Have fun!

As for toxic compounds as impurities in your drug, in the case of many potent psychedelics it wouldn't be a concern. Example, LSD has a threshold dose of 25 ug, and is rarely consumed above 100-200ug. If half of that were potassium cyanide, it would never hurt you because its such a low amount. Few toxins have any dangerous effects at 25 ug.

[Edited on 2-21-2012 by AirCowPeaCock]

497 - 21-2-2012 at 10:45

Glad to see at least a couple people are interested.

Look up how many people have been successfully prosecuted under the analogue act...

I do believe the religious freedom rights may be the best hope for an expedient end to the war on drugs. If DMT is ruled as usable as a sacrament, all you have to do is prove that other entheogens are too...

Please please I am begging everyone, read this article, take it to heart, and spread it as far and wide as you can. http://www.acceler8or.com/tags/entheogens/

We need lots of people to start engaging in semi-scientific entheogen research outside of institutions. The advent of low cost, effective, legal alternatives to LSD is exactly what will allow such research. If enough solid evidence is amassed quickly enough, it will be impossible for a conservative backlash to prevent the inevitable.

We've seen how mass communication can topple regimes rapidly. There is huge potential for rapid change here. Enough people are dissatisfied, and enough have internet connections. It is fully possible to see an entirely new world by the end of the year. Oh course those in power will attempt to sensor/shut down the internet, just as Egypt did. There are always ways around that. For example: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Off-the-Record_Messaging
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tor_(anonymity_network)
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bitcoin
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Silk_Road_(anonymous_marketplace)

There may be hope after all.

Edit
Turd, better yet, salicylic acid can be electrolytically reduced to hydroxybenzaldehyde/hydroxybenzyl alcohol.

[Edited on 21-2-2012 by 497]

turd - 21-2-2012 at 10:48

Quote: Originally posted by GreenD

I laughed when he specifically stated (twice) that he will NOT explain how he made the chemicals, in the experimental section.

Seriously? I never thought twice about it because I think the 2,5-dimethoxy-phenethylamines are just fine and need no modification, but wouldn't it be as trivial as forming the Schiff base of 2C-X and 2-methoxybenzaldehyde on the Dean-Stark and reduce that with NaBH4. As in trivial organic beginner chemistry? OTC methods for 2C-X and 2-MeO-BA are found on this very site. Search and ye shall find.

Or, of course, the other way round: 2-methoxybenzylamine + 2,5-dimethoxy-phenylacetaldehyde.

AirCowPeaCock - 21-2-2012 at 11:25

I'm not going to look that up, but based on your attitude I'm going to guess it is between few and none.

GreenD - 21-2-2012 at 12:01

Strassman's research was allowed to be carried out (See DMT Spirit Molecule documentary) because he specifically sought out "boring" research on the compound - heart rate, eye dilation, etc. While his real interest was obvious. D. Nichols actually told him this - "Do not investigate (openly) anything about the spirituality of the experience" etc, thus he was able to conduct this. (also - 497 - like your link suggests, the FDA is becoming more open, perhaps from the long-haired 60's people retiring and saying f**k it).

Turd - I laughed because he didn't say anything about it being elementary, it was clear he didn't want some random cookers to get a recipe. I giggled.

Honestly this chemistry doesn't seem simple to me. I don't know how to get reducing agents like NaBH4 or the starting catechols or related compounds. However, I trust your people's judgement that it is quite simple stuff. I just would not expect dimethoxy compounds to be readily available! Atleast not in the US.

Bot0nist - 21-2-2012 at 13:24