• Psychedelic Drugs Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
    PD's Best Threads Index
    Social ThreadSupport Bluelight
    Psychedelic Beginner's FAQ

[Comparison Subthread] Acid vs. Mushrooms

I'm a bit tired of people saying anything natural must be "hippy". That just shows you've absorbed the right wing medias attempts to make you think natural is bad and GM foods and pollution is good. Fuck that. Lets go back to thinking natural is good and forget about any "hippy" connotations.
 
Umm no.
On the issue of strychnine in LSD:
The following text was written by Alexander T. Shulgin in response to the overwhelming misconception that strychnine is commonly found in street samples of LSD:
"The observation of strychnine as being present in any street drug, as a by-product, or a contaminant, or an impurity has never been documented. It is a natural plant product, as are the ergots which are used in the synthesis of LSD. But they come from totally unrelated plants; there has never been a report of strychnine and an ergot alkaloid co-existing in a single species. So if the two materials are together in a drug sample, it could only be by the hand of man. I have personally looked a large number of illicit street offerings and have never detected the presence of strychnine. The few times that I have indeed found it present, have been in legal exhibits where it usually occurred in admixture with brucine (also from the plant Strychnos nux-vomica) in criminal cases involving attempted or successful poisoning.
The same argument applies to the myth that occasionally surfaces, that strychnine occurs in the white tufts of peyote. This is equally fraudulent -- it has never been reported in that cactus or any other cactus."
Furthermore, it should probably be spelled out that strychnine is not needed to bond LSD to blotter paper, nor is strychnine a breakdown product of LSD. these are probably the two most commonly repeated gross misconceptions.
The source of the "strychnine is commonly found in LSD" myth may be somewhat grounded in truth. For example, in "LSD: My Problem Child" Albert Hofmann cites a case in the late sixties of Strychnine being found in an "LSD" sample that was a white powder. However, what is commonly claimed is that strychnine is found in a significant percentage of LSD, specifically blotter LSD, which is *not* true. Shulgin's note that he has analyzed many samples of LSD and never found strychnine is backed up by published analyses done by PharmChem and the LA County Street Drug Analysis program, which likewise never found any strychnine.
This is intuitively backed up by the fact that a 5mm x 5mm "standard" square of blotter LSD only weights about 2mg and if the paper itself was made completely out of pure strychnine it is still on the very low end of Strychnine's threshold of activity.
Strychnine is not the cause of tracers, cramps, nausea, or amphetamine-like LSD-effects. Its possible that poorly synthesized LSD might have other ergot derivatives in it, which might contribute to the harsh body load that some get on taking LSD. Also, the very close chemical relatives 1-Methyl-LSD and 1-Acetyl-LSD (which break down into LSD in aqueous solution) might be present in some street samples and might contribute to the harsh body load. (Petter Stafford has claimed in his _Psychedelics Encyclopedia_ that 1-Acetyl-LSD is supposedly "smoother" than d-LSD -- thus "strychnine laced acid" may acutally be pure d-LSD, while "pure lsd" may be 1-Acetyl-LSD or some substitute). And the chemicals iso-LSD and lumi-LSD which are breakdown products of LSD might contribute to the body loading on some trips, particularly via a hypothetical synergistic effect. Given this plethora of possible chemicals in street "LSD", its not needed to look to a chemical which has hardly ever been found in analyzed samples to explain variations in the strength and "cleanliness" of street acid.
Its also possible that LSD itself simply causes adverse physical effects, particularly muscle cramping, in persons suceptible to it. The reported side effects of LSD (the nausea and apparent CNS stimulant effects) are commonly reported side effects of seritonergic drugs such as fluoxetine (Prozac) and buspirone (Buspar), and also are commonly reported (and typically more severe) with other psychedelics like Mescaline.
Or its quite likely that the "strychnine" reactions to LSD are entirely psychosomatic. Both Leary ("The Psychedelic Experience") and Lilly ("Programming and Metaprogramming...", "Center of the Cyclone") have each observed this reaction in people who cannot handle the surge of emotion associated with a trip.
Further advice would be to avoid methylxanthines (caffiene, theophylline in tea, etc) prior to dosing. Some have noted a possible synergistic effect between them and LSD causing, or contributing, to a harsh body load during a trip. And prior use of dramamine may alleviate the nausea sometimes associated with LSD, and other psychedelic drugs (although it may also effect the quality of the trip -- Shulgin has noted in PiHKAL that he shuns the use of anti-nauseants in order to experience the effects of the psychedelic, both good and bad, with no possible interference).
In summary, it can't be said that we know specifically why sometimes acid feels "cleaner" than other times. However, based on the availability of plausible explanations, and the evidence of drug analysis, and general implausiblity of the whole strychnine concept, we can conclude that it isn't due to any concentration of strychnine. Also, while it can't completely be ruled out, the presence of strychnine in LSD is so minimal that the majority of LSD users will never once come across it.
[ 11 May 2002: Message edited by: inthegame ]
 
Thank you, inthegame, the strychnine in acid myth is one that has been bought wholesale by the American public, some of the government, and even people of the medical profession. It's a sad and sorry state of affairs.
The most important thing to remember is that strychnine IS NOT active at doses that could be held on blotter paper.
 
shrooms are better in my opinion, but acid is just as much FUN! Shrooms seem to be a more, personally spiritual expierence for me personally, but acid is way fun to get whacked with my friends.
If ur nervious about tripping but very curious, try one dose of lsd or 2 grams of shrooms. Then see which u prefer and take gradual high doses of each (most likely you will love both!)
 
Personally, I prefer 'shrooms. They're natural, so you don't have to worry about any "iffy" chemistry. Plus the trip is much shorter, which can make a big difference if you're not enjoying yourself. Also, 'shroom will "direct" the trip (if you let them). They have things to say & will try their best to get you to pay attention. Acid on the other hand, will make you examine your personality under a microscope. It is very psychoanalytic, and it might be easier to have a bad trip.
Just my opinion...I could be wrong...
 
You don't have to worry about "iffY" chemistry?
What do you mean by "iffy"
Mushrooms have loads more chemicals in them.. lsd=one chemical.
What is there to worry about in regard to the chemistry?
Personally if I were to buy a dose of lsd or a sack of shrooms from a dealer I don't know I am more worried about the shrooms.
 
The whole synthetic/organic is pretty fucking meaningless in terms of real world usage. A molecule is a molecule is a molecule, and preferences fo shrooms based solely on it's 'natural' status strikes me as a little dumb.
Having said that, I prefer a good mushroom trip, but you're not gonna know which one is best for you until you've tried 'em both
 
What's the difference in growing your own shrooms and getting some half-baked guys version of LSD that he's manufactured in some crap filthy lab? I can think of a few.
 
That's a poor comparison. Yes shrooms may be safer if you're assured of their authenticity, but the same may be said for cid. Remember, poisons occur in nature too.
 
LSD is pretty difficult to manufacture, that being said the people who produce most likely aren't "Half-Baked", like its been said before its almost always; Plain blotter, weak blotter, strong blotter ( not from a chemistry mistake but from how the blotter was dipped, how diluted, how it was stored ).
Anyone know what chemicals would likely occur from a LSD synthesis that doesn't turn out quite right?
[ 12 May 2002: Message edited by: inthegame ]
 
I'd say shrooms are easier to deal with at a lower dose than a low dose of acid partly because the trip lasts half as long but at higher doses I've had MUCH more intense and harder to handle trips on shrooms than acid.
For a starter I'd say a low dose of shrooms but trips on either can go bad if you don't respect them.
Craig
 
GRRRRRRRRRR! You guys are confusing me!!! I'll read some posts and i'll think "yah shrooms is the way to go" then i read the next one and i'm thinking...wtf,now what?? AHHHHHH!!!!!!!!
 
I still think which is 'best (better?)' is still a matter of opinion. Seems everyone is making some (mostly) valid points, but how can anyone say which one would be 'best'? Pluses and minuses for each. Better for who? You or the original poster?
Ya pays yer money, and ya takes yer chances.
 
Most everyone will agree that for a first time a low dose of shrooms is better for yer first time then acid.
There are just other things we were babbling about.
 
I was referring to a point made by someone else. I just feel that there is no 'best' answer for your question. We can offer our opinions, but ultimately, the choice is yours. You did show that you are reasonably intelligent, by asking in the first place. Sort throught the answers that you get here. Read info at Erowid and other sites. Above all, just make an 'informed' choice. Once you've done that, read trip reports and other posts about actually doing it. There are some informal guidelines to tripping, especially your first time, to help insure a reasonably safe adventure. Be safe.
[ 12 May 2002: Message edited by: A. Wizard ]
 
Go for the shrooms, you'll have a lot more control over yourself. I like shrooms better, just for the fact that I can control my functions a little better.
as for sass, the guy that said he thinks bluelighters are gay or whatever he said, you're a cool guy to say that in the middle of a post for no reason. cool guy.
but yeah, first time, go for the shrooms, get an appreciation for going psychedelic, then move onto acid, it's quite a bit stronger.
 
i didnt say bluelighters were gay i said they piss me off and there are lots of reasons, if you dont understand then your probably one of the people sprouting bullshit about tripping off rat poison etc. better to keep your mouth shut and look stupid then open your mouth and remove all doubt.
my opinion is that the comeup on shrooms is alot more uncomrtable and scary, also the experience can be a bit rougher but at least it only lasts like 3-5 hours. there's usually a fair bit of nausea at high doses as well.
acid has a very nice euphoric comeup and the first 5-6 hours are very cool and usually positive but after that you (i) get very drained, tired and really just want it to stop, thats when the trip can get a bit negative or not so fun. it's usually a good time to pop a valium or drink some g.
so personally if i had the choice of what to do the first time i would do acid if i had some benzos or g to knock me out or relax the trip after i got tired of it otherwise a smallish dose of mushies
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top