^rats cant distinguish between most psychedelics.
IIRC, 5-meo-dmt and amt fully substitute in rats
^rats cant distinguish between most psychedelics.
IIRC, 5-meo-dmt and amt fully substitute in rats
I know how many people react to conspiracy theories, but nevertheless I must get this out of my head: It is a proven fact that DEA has been involved in smuggling operations, bringing huge amounts of illicit drugs into the US. They allow the cartels to operate until they get pissed off at one, then they destroy it. If we can stop 'terrorist plots,' most likely 90+% propaganda anyway, from being pulled off inside this country (don't even get me started on 9/11), then how are all these meth labs, LSD labs, and such still operating? I'll share my feelings on this: The government uses all drugs to perpetuate the police state in an attempt to keep the population scared and willing to give up its rights as defined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Who's saying that DEA and other organizations within our own government don't have the ability to manufacture something nearly identical to LSD? The reports of this mystery substance claim that the 'analogs' don't have as much of a spiritual, deep thinking effect a the real deal. One of the main problems that I believe the government has with true LSD is that it can open people's minds and let them come to the realization that we are all one and the reigns must be severed so that self- destructive ideas can self- destruct on their own, hurting as few people as possible. It is my belief that my government has technology decades if not hundreds of years ahead of what we know about. That we Americans have paid for. Not to mention that through the UN can set up shop in almost any country around the world to distribute the aforementioned product wherever they wish. That would take care of the 'Europe is the source' argument. We just don't know enough about how the New World Order works to dismiss any possibility.
I've had a talk with someone from the testing service here in the Netherlands a while ago. The testing service overhere is quite lacking, if they cannot recognize it, you will get an "unknown", it's really not all that useful for the exotic chemicals we're talking about here. The guy I talked to didn't even know of a DOC example being sent in, just DOB, he even doubted they would recognize DOC. Then again, I have no idea how long he worked there.
I hope it worked thanks for making me smile!
on a more serious note: am i right that those analogues would be considered "research chemicals"?
edit: btw i couldn't imagine that the new world order guys have great objections to lsd use... with their pyramid and the eye.... ummm where have i seen those things again... ah right! lsd it was
Last edited by RainbowWarrior; 24-01-2011 at 00:29.
^you wont find them on any website if thats what youre thinking
hehe wasn't thinking about that... but that would be great too
no, in my real-world surroundings there are quite a few people who take shrooms or lsd but think of "RCs" as dangerous because they haven't been studied extensively (one of the reasons i can't stand the "RC" term, although better than "china-drugs" what my gf named them )
And there already are quite a lot people who are suspicious of basically anything they buy as acid (can't tell how many times i have heard things like "but real lsd, like in the 60es, doesn't even exist anymore") this will prevent more people from buying blotters and will enforce and revive a lot of other old myths about acid...
it's a shame that there must be so much misinformation about such a wonderful compound only because of stupid humans and their stupid laws...
You are overlooking a few important facts .....the only fact based evidence here. Peoples impressions of an intensely powerful psychedelic are oh so very subjective, as you acknowledge. All of the statistically significant data, like analyses, seizures, and first hand knowledge show that LSD is LSD (not including DOX, simple amines, inactives). Yeah, people report differing impressions and experiences. But if this is due to another lysergamide in wide circulation, where is the data? Data is the most important part of the equation, no? Should it show up in samples, forensics, etc, or be acknowledged by its manufacturers, then there will be data.....
amanitadine, darling, did you even read the beginning of this thread? See my post here http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showpost....49&postcount=6 (courtesy of Some Kinda Love). THERE IS YOUR DATA!!!
It begins with DOCUMENTED PROOF of a GC/MS of what was a VERY LARGE WIDESPREAD run of blotters a couple years ago... originating in Europe, but distributed worldwide, which I myself acquired a sheet of in the US... purported at the time to me as very clean "real" LSD. Which was a BIG FAT LIE!!! And when I did it, BEFORE I SAW THIS, many months ago, I thought, "well pretty pleasant drug, fairly clean feeling, but it does NOT seem like the BEST of the pure LSD I did about 1980-1982.. FAR less visual, FAR less 'sense of awe', and somewhat more bodyload." But I bought into all the hoo-haw being bandied about that "ITs all in your head... set and setting... you are just pining for the good ole days... get over it... ALL LSD IS IN FACT OF NECESSITY PERFECTLY GOOD CLEAN REAL PURE LSD, silly old hippie!" A faith-based wishful-thinking point of view that has, thanks mto SKL's efforts been proven WITH HARD DATA to be bullshit.
GC/MS test was done showing it was NOT LSD... also there are links to journal articles discussing active hallucinogenic ergoloids that are fully active at LSD doses and can fit on blotters. So its not as if these these are not out there. We have PROVEN that they ARE out there, and the print in question was known to be a HUGE run, probably tens if not hundreds of thousands of hits. I see no reason not to assume that it was just the tip of the iceberg.
Last edited by DwayneHoover; 24-01-2011 at 01:49.
i am also VERY MUCH skeptical of your purported claim of the human mind's ability to "discriminate finely between subjective effects" - if this was true, we would have no conception of a "placebo effect," let alone see it present in so many studies/use it as the standard to compare actual effects against. what you're saying simply doesn't cohere with the reality of the situation, which is that suggestion and expectation play a huge factor in the way humans subjectively interpret the effects of drugs.
Last edited by amanitadine; 24-01-2011 at 04:05.
^You are just pulling that figure straight out of your ass... it's based on NOTHING but your guesses and presumptions and wishful thinking, and has absolutely zero scientific or statistical validity.
Watch this video of a woman given a mere 100 micrograms of real pure Sandoz LSD. Listen to her descriptions of the effects - visual, emotional, mental. Does this sound like even close to what you have been getting? And how many hits did you need for your effects?
by Don Lattin - Author of 'Jesus Freaks' and 'The Harvard Psychedelic Club'
Here's some rare footage of an experimental LSD session that I came across doing research for my next book, a group biography of British writer Aldous Huxley, philosopher Gerald Heard, and Bill Wilson, the co-founder of Alcoholics Anonymous. It's from a television program, circa 1956, about mental health issues.
The researcher, Dr. Sidney Cohen, was dosing volunteers at the Veteran's Administration Hospital in Los Angeles. Aldous Huxley, who first tried mescaline in 1953 and wrote about it in his seminal book, The Doors of Perception, got Gerald Heard interested in the spiritual potential of psychedelic drugs.
Heard then turned on Bill Wilson, guiding him on an LSD trip supervised by Dr. Cohen in the summer of 1956 -- perhaps in the same room we see in this video. Wilson, who started AA in the 1930s, thought LSD could help alcoholics have the "spiritual awakening" that is such an important part of the twelve-step recovery program he popularized.
Heard and Huxley set the stage for better-known psychedelic research of Timothy Leary, Richard "Ram Dass" Alpert, Huston Smith and Andrew Weil, who are profiled in my 2010 book, The Harvard Psychedelic Club.
Thats why the 99.9% figure was followed by a wink, silly. I will stand by 99% . And no, it is not based on guesses and assumptions, it is based on the current data available, which is a lot harder data than anything you are presenting to the contrary. I mean really, is that video of the woman tripping hard years ago your substantiation? But really...if there is so much non-LSD LSD circulating, why isn't there more than this one sample amongst thousands seized and analyzed? I assure you it isn't Ehrlichs reagent that is used in forensics past the roadside. Is this the conspiracy? That it all somehow avoids being analyzed? I don't get it. Yeah, LSD "crystal" supposedly straight from the source is already only (on average) 60% pure. And blotters are way weaker than advertised, as is most liquid. But what I (and everyone I know) has gotten for years is still good old LSD. And look at the labs seized over the years. All of the smaller scale labs producing LSD. Sand says he played around with various analogs, but only ever put the allyl into circulation, and that was a one off. Pickard put a tiny amount of ALD-52 out, and attempted to put out the diazetamide in small quanitities, and it wasn't received as well as LSD and required some nasty ass precursors so it was scrapped. I know of someone who produced the morpholide in very small quantities for novelties sake, and it was distributed as labeled. So where is it all then? I'm just trying to look at the evidence, not assumptions, and subjective speculation.
Last edited by amanitadine; 24-01-2011 at 04:58.
^ I agree wholeheartedly with this more staid approach. Even if I am enthusiastically promoting the idea that LS? exists and circulates, I am not for a second trying to get behind some of the more lurid conspiritorialism that surrounds such theories. (LSD-trippers tend to have a certain affinity for lurid conspiritorialism!) Any debate about facts and figures is speculative ar best, though.
The GC/MS that i posted above came from a well circulated blotter that made people trip in an LSD-like way, but that many people were suspicious of, hence why it was tested. I am still waiting to hear back from the person who did the interpretation so he can answer some of the questions posed here ... If it is not LSP or LSB, then it is still not LSD, and I'm even more curious as to what it really is ... As I said, the plot thickens! If the interpretation was wrong I will be glad to admit so, and to retract my speculations as to the identity of the molecule ... that's the scientific process. If this theory is shot down, I'll be glad to be a part of trying to develop the next one, and would be very happy to hear anyone else's ideas as to what it might be. Regrettably I do have more samples on hand, but it might be possible for someone to obtain some and do more testing. This is still a big mystery we have here, and I hope that discussion here can continue in a mature vein and not get bogged down by bickering and people holding too hard and fast to assumptions.
OK, so I guess I am a Lurid Conspiritorialist, then. Though I don't know what exactly labeling my opinion with such an insulting title is intended to accomplish, other than smack me down for disagreeing with you.
Which in and of itself sort of confirms the conspiritorialism, wouldn't you think?
Anyway, call me what you like I really don't give a rat's ass.
OK, so it seems to me that one should apply Occams Razor: The simplest explanation is probably correct.
Given that I and others collectively over 30-40 years have done many many blotters, microdots, barrels, windowpanes, etc. from many different makers, and experienced at time VASTLY, SEVERLY different effects... Given that there have been thousands of different manufacturing runs over that time period, laid by an even larger number of distributors, 99.999999% of which went TOTALLY unverified by GC/MS in any documented way, and given that so many people have experienced a HUGE spectrum off different effects from Very Excellent to Middling to Horribly Bad, the LOGICAL conclusion, the scientific conclusion according to Occam is: WE WERE DOING SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT DRUGS OR ONE DRUG PLUS CONTAMINANTS OR SYNERGENTS CONSISTING OF RELATED SISTER MOLECULES OR OTHER COMPONENTS FROM AN IMPERFECT SYNTHESIS.
The idea that no, all these different reports are just in peoples heads, and that all these THOUSANDS of different productions and distributions were all always by necessity THE EXACT SAME PERFECT PURE MOLECULE is actually the radical hypothesis here, given that you have NO test restults from 99.999999% of the "LSD" ever produced, but you do have human experience reports from alot of them that report very differing effects.
Different Effect Reports == Different Drugs, is the "Simplest explanation" that Occam's Razor demands, IMO.
And by the way, what, exactly, "lurid consiracy" are you saying that I am advancing, because I dont recall ever outlining or suggesting one.
You are erecting a "Strawman", in order to knock it down and appear more correct and reasonable yourself... not because you are involved in any "lurid conspiracy," but rather because: you are human, and like to think your opinion is right and is blessed by the mantle of scientific validity, when I am saying it is not, and is largely a bunch of opinions and presumptions based on extremely minimal data, considering the huge amount of material that has been produced over many many years.
I got some blotter recently that is giving me bad stomach pains when I do a lot. I have never really done big doses of acid but with this stuff I got in quantity I decided to take a solid 6-7 hits after I had already tried it in smaller 1-2 hit doses a few times.
I get really high off it, and I've done acid in small doses like 20-30 times before this so I'm sure it is legit. But this blotter seems to make me have to shit every time I take it, something I don't remember so much from previous acid (although there are a lot of variables with this) and when I did the big dose I got major stomach pains... the "lay on the floor in pain" type pains people mentioned in this thread.
I did a big dose again (~5 hits) more recently, and it did the same thing. Excruciating pain, although it didn't last as long, but I realized the problem is gas and once I fart a bunch of air out (sorry gross I know) the pain goes away and all is well again.
The air forms in my stomach around 3 hours into the trip. I'm cool for like 2 hours, tripping balls, really good visuals with the higher dosing, have a good time and then the stomach issue kicks in.
I felt it happen the second time because I was waiting for it. My stomach just does this "mmmm rumble bumble liquid bubble" thing and BAM major pain until I can fart, which takes a while (as I sit on the toilet looking at magazines, trying to enjoy the moving pictures lol).
The other side reactions I got with the first huge dose was eye swelling, as bad as I've ever seen my eyes swell. I've had psychedelics fuck up my looks many times, but never eye swelling. Also my stomach seems to bloat a bit with it and generally feels fatter despite not eating much for the trip. I am pretty lean so small differences in bodyfat change I can notice, and the high dose acid seemed to make me a big chunkier for some reason.
I was thinking for a while it must be some other RC, especially because of the eye swelling I had the one time. But now that I think about it I doubt it, it's probably good ol cid I'm just doing things different than the last time I had the stuff, which was about 2 years before this but my life habits have changed a lot.
I think maybe the piracetam I take (also been doing aniracetam and other nootropics with the acid; never did that before) or this bacteria culture yogurt I eat might be contributing to the stomach issue. I also did accutane therapy this past year (March-September) and the medicine is probably still in my system even now, and was definitely when I took the big doses 2-3 months ago.
So I'm not sure where I am going wrong, but next time I take any I'm getting this GAS-X stuff I saw advertised on TV and popping a few before and during to see if I can't prevent the stomach issues.
Well anyways I just wanted to share my experience.
The only way you could take anecdotes even slightly seriously was if the woman had two batches - one Sandoz and one non-ergoloid and she was taking them alternately every week in double blind tests. If she could reliably tell the difference then we could take this theory seriously. But some teenager saying "i took acid at the Iron Maiden concert 6 months ago and then I took some with my girlfriend last night and it wasn't quite the same". What does that prove?
it doesn't prove anything
i also think its interesting dwayne that you're invoking occams razor to support the least simple explanation
whatever is being circulated as LSD is claimed to be LSD. the simplest explanation is that it is simply LSD
which is to say that you cant meaningfully invoke occams razor in a situation where there is a lack of evidence to prove one explanation over another. you're relying on the lack of concrete evidence to postulate your theory while negating another but you aren't realizing that your own theory is subject to the same criticism.
if you're going to base your argument off of a lack of evidence, then don't invoke occam because you're simply using it in a vacuum.
I find this thread quite interesting and feel I should add something here.
In the US, late '90s I had tried some dark-purple windowpanes that looked almost black unless you held them to a light. These were similar to but definitely not LSD. They were subjectively different.
With sublingual dosing it would suddenly hit fast and hard in only 10 minutes with intense OEVs where the walls were melting. There was no build up like with real L, it hit all at once. The visuals were more intense and slightly different in a way. It also seemed to be lacking the same depth as the original and did feel less anxiogenic. I didn't notice the duration being much different but wasn't watching the time either.
I shared my observations with others that had sampled the same batch and they agreed that the experience was subjectively different from what they were used to. The visual intensity was what seemed to be noticed the most.
Anyone here who had tried these will know what I'm talking about. It felt more like LSD than anything else, but was not LSD. I always suspected it was another ergoline.
I ask because I acquired some hoffman blotter early 2009 of which I still have a couple of hits left. They came from the Netherlands. However, they have a weird taste and are not as weak as what you describe. Yours could have degraded before you got them though.
If I can somehow confirm that what I have is part of one of the suspected batches I will definitely look into getting it analyzed. It might be a couple of weeks though, as I have no idea of how to go about it yet and am pretty busy at the moment (exams).