• N&PD Moderators: Skorpio | thegreenhand

⫸STICKY⫷ 3,4-methylenedioxy-N&PD SOCIAL THREAD v. 1

220px-TCB-2.png

TCB-2. Psychedelic, apparently very potent. Not that potency is necessarily a sign of quality goods (25-n-boXX and bromo-dragonfly), but this structure intrigues me. Makes me wonder about the potential of other substitutions.

Any guesses?

I would like to sample TCN-2 (i.e. -Br replaced with -NO2). I reread the Pihkal piece on 2CN in which Shulgin states that it's almost as good as MDMA. I also note that DON is not psychedelic but a potent, long acting stimulant so I would like to try the (S) isomer of that.
 
I’m not sure how active any of you are on neuroscience twitter, but it seems there is a schism developing among some prominent psychedelic scientists

From my understanding, it all started with this Nature Medicine article, which had a neuroimaging component:

Increased global integration in the brain after psilocybin therapy for depression


Surprisingly, there was no reference to previous psychedelic neuroimaging work done by Manoj Doss et al. See here:

Psilocybin therapy increases cognitive and neural flexibility in patients with major depressive disorder

Doss expressed his disbelief on twitter (see Doss’ reply to Carhart-Harris here) that this was an oversight, rather he seems to think it was a snub. And quite frankly, it is hard to believe that Carhartt-Harris et al would not have read that paper given how few psychedelic neuroimaging studies there are

Then, Doss et al released this critique of the original Nature Medicine article:

Skepticism About Recent Evidence that Psilocybin Opens Depressed Minds

Followed by a critique of the critique put out by Carhart-Harris et al:

A critique of: Skepticism About Recent Evidence that Psilocybin Opens Depressed Minds

And I’ve seen various (strongly worded) tweets from both sides as well. Too many to link them all but just browse through Doss and Carhart-Harris respective twitter accounts if you’re curious

I’m sure most of you have noted that this split falls pretty squarely between institutional lines, John Hopkins vs. Imperial College London

It would be sad to see any future collaborations squashed due to this beef

I don’t know what to make of it all tbh, I’m curious what others think
 
Forgot to mention, that the critiques are very strongly worded and in my opinion the one put out by Carhart-Harris et al borders on ad hominem attacks at some point

So it’s not just scientific discussion, to me it seems to be a genuine “conflict”
 
Forgot to mention, that the critiques are very strongly worded and in my opinion the one put out by Carhart-Harris et al borders on ad hominem attacks at some point

So it’s not just scientific discussion, to me it seems to be a genuine “conflict”
Been following it a little bit. I wouldn't worry about collaborations getting squashed, plenty of acrimonious rivals in science collaborate with each other still.

It ususally doesn't spill into the public sphere, but conferences can be really wild places (people pulling the "this is more of a comment than a question" trick and then attacking the rationale behind studies is pretty common).
 
Been following it a little bit. I wouldn't worry about collaborations getting squashed, plenty of acrimonious rivals in science collaborate with each other still.

It ususally doesn't spill into the public sphere, but conferences can be really wild places (people pulling the "this is more of a comment than a question" trick and then attacking the rationale behind studies is pretty common).
That’s fair

Still sad to see it devolving into personal insults, but I guess you’re right that it’s not terribly uncommon throughout science
 
Can anyone with EEG/brain-wave-states knowledge take a look at this post:
:Sherlock:
I don't think there is enough info in that post to really make any kind of definative statements. I am also unsure of how to tie in the concept of brain wave states to the linked post.

Honestly my gut response is to suggest that your relationship with coke is changing and you are becoming tolerant the more relaxing/euphoric effects which leads you to take higher doses therefore getting more negative side effects. Mouth activity is a super common side effect of railing on stimulants.
 
Coffee drinking and some other herbal and culinary ingredients protect against damage made by ionizing radiation. People who drink more coffee have demonstrably less side effects from radiation therapy of cancer, and even de-caf coffee seems to have some of this effect if too much caffeine causes anxiety. Could be useful in the case of a nuclear disaster/war.

 
Copied and pasted from a PD social thread, figured it might be better suited for you nerds 💙
Been doing a lot of high end associative thinking lately about the way different STEM disciplines fit together. This morning I was thinking about music theory in relation to math in relation to chemistry (harmonics connects music to physics to chemistry since matter is vibrating) and it occurred to me that there should be a way to view the periodic table of elements in relation to the Fibonacci numbers.... Kind of relating back to the good old "rabbit problem" and ways to stack together recurring quantized shapes like particles. And sure enough after some googling -- there is! Tickled with myself that I was able to predict it. This is all the reading I've done on it so far but there's a very deep rabbit hole to go down here! Thought some of you guys may be interested.


The article doesn't go into it, but part of what's going on is that the elements that fall "in between" the Fibonacci numbers tend to be more reactive, I believe, based on the number of electrons in their outer valence shell as one of the main trends. Which is part of why carbon, with it's four outermost electrons (half the full shell) is able to form the backbone of so much organic chemistry.

Recently had a couple DOC trips for the first time in over 8 years (have barely touched psychedelics since before my cancer) and it's got my brain firing on all gears! Spiral out my swirly friends!

Edit -- you know, "reactive" isn't necessarily the right term for it in general... More reactive as far as covalent bonding is concerned is perhaps a better way to look at the ones that fall in series with Carbon (that trend just on the organic side of the semimetal line). The ones that are further away from that series to be more ionically reactive, out to the point where they suddenly become nonreactive (noble gas series).

Images to go along with it for anyone that doesn't want to click the link. The visuals definitely help.

0OptKGm.jpeg

Notice how new groups in the standard periodic table tend to recur in a similar pattern as how the new color pairs recur in the classic depiction of the Fibonacci rabbit problem

CjDs4Qk.jpeg


620Y03r.jpeg

LCD9Kfo.jpeg


4CmQcew.jpeg

fo0EGpo.png
A couple more good visualizations to go along with this, and some more comments that I lazily copied and pasted from IMing with ebola? (Oh btw ebola is doing well if anyone has wondered over time lol, not sure how often he shows up here)

For some reason Cesium breaks the general trend there of families and the rabbit problem tho, at 55. Perhaps it's technically a start of some new undescribed series.

The halogen series starts on a magic number I believe because it falls on either side of a Fibonacci number in two ways.... Atomic number 9 and 7 valence electrons in the second shell. 3, 6, and 9 as magic numbers also being important for periodicity in general. A symmetrical series as opposed to the symmetry breaking series described in general by Fibonacci style sequences (the Lucas numbers also relate but I have yet to read much about that rabbit hole. The Quora answer linked explains it better tho about how the periodic table is a series of forming and breaking symmetries)

eZKiKXg.png


Some combination of the following period table and the first periodic table make it easier to visualize what I was saying about how new periodic families tend to occur along with the new color series in the original Fibonacci rabbit image, with regards to trending towards and away from organicness outward to increasing electronegativity before becoming nonreactive at the noble gases (above spiral depicts that better too I suppose now that I type that)

mSYy3We.png

CjDs4Qk.jpeg
 
In another thread, I mentioned the possibility that the doubling of brain kynurenic acid levels by high doses of L-tryptophan (5 g/day) could possibly potentiate the effect of dissociatives, as kynurenate blocks the glycine binding site on NMDA receptors. Looking at some publications, it also seems that COX-1 inhibitors such as aspirin and paracetamol (acetaminophen) cause a similar increase in brain kynurenic acid concentration. In this article, this has been tested in rats with indomethacin. NMDAr glycine site blockers are also known to cause an anxiolytic effect, and this is also seen with paracetamol and aspirin, which makes me suspect that this effect of NSAIDs could be caused by them affecting metabolic kynurenate production. The anti-anxiety effect of paracetamol is usually attributed to its influence on endocannabinoid metabolism, but the kynurenic acid pathway could also be a factor in this. The possibility of aspirin or paracetamol potentiating the effect of ketamine, PCP and other dissociatives is somewhat significant, because someone could easily take that combination without knowing that there can be a synergistic effect.

Curiously, the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug indomethacin has also caused psychotic symptoms to some people, as have some other drugs of that class as well, and it wouldn't be surprising if this is caused by it affecting the NMDA receptor.

Edit: looks like there is this thread on BL about HA-966, which is an NMDA glycine site blocker or partial agonist.
 
Last edited:
Top