Ehrlich's reagent testing questions

[Kallisti23]

Would the possibility of another psychoactive substance present alongside an indole explain it? I can’t see why anyone would bother tbh, and the other substance would have to be very potent. Just trying to think of possible explanations...

 

[TripSitterNZ]

Would the possibility of another psychoactive substance present alongside an indole explain it? I can’t see why anyone would bother tbh, and the other substance would have to be very potent. Just trying to think of possible explanations...

nah its most likely 100% LSD if its tested positive for a indole. The LSD is probably more crude product instead of been recrystallized and put through a column to remove impurities giving you that heavy body load head fuck fog trip.

 

[Kallisti23]

Thanks for all the responses folks! It’s an interesting discussion. Certainly some food for thought...

 

[Hodor]

The whole point is that it is inactive it means it doesn't allow you to trip on it alone and gives negative physical side effects. Shulgin was the one who gave nick sands the recipe for 99.9% LSD. Shulgin and Nick later on agree that anything less than 99.9% LSD has more and more physical side effects when used.

Gonna call bullshit on that. Shulgin specifically mentions in PIHKAL that the primary impurity in LSD - iso-LSD - does not produce any noticeable effect at doses of up to 4 milligrams. Yes, that's 4,000 micrograms! This is what he had to say about it in TIHKaL:

Let me mention in passing, that there are three stereoisomers possible for d-LSD. There are d-iso-LSD, l-LSD, and l-iso-LSD. The inversion of the stereochemistry of the attached diethylcarboxyamido group of d-LSD gives the diastereoisomer (d-iso-LSD) which is a frequent synthetic impurity of d-LSD itself. The corresponding optical antipodes l-LSD and l-iso-LSD are also known and have been tasted. All three are completely inactive: d-iso-LSD shows no psychological changes at an oral dose of 4 milligrams; l-LSD none at up to 10 milligrams orally; and l-iso-LSD none at 500 micrograms orally. These dramatic decreases in potency show both the stereoselectivity of the native LSD molecule in producing its central effects, and the LSD-free purity of these isomers.

(Edit: Whoops, looks like sekio already posted that. Still, it bears repeating.)

To reiterate Skorpio's point: if only 99,9% LSD is free of side-effects, then whatever impurity is causing these side-effects would have to be active at a "purity" of 0,1%. So if we're talking a typical 100 mcg hit of LSD, you'd be getting effects from a 0,1 mcg dose of said impurity.
And that impurity obviously can't be D-iso-LSD - which is the primary impurity found in samples of LSD - so our mysterious active impurity would actually have to be active at less than 0,1 mcg.

 

[Hodor]

Slightly unrelated question; but does anyone here know if Ehrlic’s works for testing 1cp-LSD?

Yes and no. The 1-acyl-group (propionyl in 1p-LSD, acetyl in ALD-52, cyclopropylcarbonyl in 1cp-LSD) has to be hydrolyzed in order for the reagent to react. This is why the reagent should be warm (around 30°C / 90°F) in order to be able to cleave off the acyl group, otherwise the reaction can take pretty long... especially since I would assume that the cyclopropylcarbonyl group is harder to cleave than the others due to steric hindrance.

 

[TripSitterNZ]

Gonna call bullshit on that. Shulgin specifically mentions in PIHKAL that the primary impurity in LSD - iso-LSD - does not produce any noticeable effect at doses of up to 4 milligrams. Yes, that's 4,000 micrograms! This is what he had to say about it in TIHKaL:

Let me mention in passing, that there are three stereoisomers possible for d-LSD. There are d-iso-LSD, l-LSD, and l-iso-LSD. The inversion of the stereochemistry of the attached diethylcarboxyamido group of d-LSD gives the diastereoisomer (d-iso-LSD) which is a frequent synthetic impurity of d-LSD itself. The corresponding optical antipodes l-LSD and l-iso-LSD are also known and have been tasted. All three are completely inactive: d-iso-LSD shows no psychological changes at an oral dose of 4 milligrams; l-LSD none at up to 10 milligrams orally; and l-iso-LSD none at 500 micrograms orally. These dramatic decreases in potency show both the stereoselectivity of the native LSD molecule in producing its central effects, and the LSD-free purity of these isomers.

(Edit: Whoops, looks like sekio already posted that. Still, it bears repeating.)

To reiterate Skorpio's point: if only 99,9% LSD is free of side-effects, then whatever impurity is causing these side-effects would have to be active at a "purity" of 0,1%. So if we're talking a typical 100 mcg hit of LSD, you'd be getting effects from a 0,1 mcg dose of said impurity.
And that impurity obviously can't be D-iso-LSD - which is the primary impurity found in samples of LSD - so our mysterious active impurity would actually have to be active at less than 0,1 mcg.

You dont make LSD so you cant call bullshit on it lmao. Its psychologically inactive wont make you trip but the negative side effects are present. LSD is a magic compound that requires the upmost care taken to it else why would the chemists spend so much trouble trying to get 99.9% via mutiple recyrtaliztions and chromography columns to remove all iso and other things. Going to call bullshit on nick sands owesly tim scully albert hoffman shulgin gammagoblin and the northen cali group and the brotherhood of eternal love?. I have handled Raw LSD crystal so i know what the true magic of it looks like in the dark.

 

[Hodor]

Going to call bullshit on nick sands owesly tim scully albert hoffman shulgin gammagoblin and the northen cali group and the brotherhood of eternal love?.

I am calling bullshit on you putting claims into their mouths.

I just quoted Shulgin saying that iso-LSD is inactive at 4000 micrograms. That is hundreds of times more than what you'd find in a blotter or solution of LSD. If less than 10 micrograms could elicit a negative bodyload, a 400-fold overdose (or 400,000-fold, if we are to believe your claims about the only good LSD being 99,9% pure) should elicit *some* reaction, even in the sober state.

If you've got citations to back up your claims, then post them here, preferably with a link to the source. While I can't link to TIHKAL because it contains a synth recipe, I think everyone here should be capable of looking up the chapter on LSD.

I have handled Raw LSD crystal so i know what the true magic of it looks like in the dark.

That is just fluorescence, not magic. DayGlo will sell you buckets of stuff that does that.

 

[TripSitterNZ]

I am calling bullshit on you putting claims into their mouths.

I just quoted Shulgin saying that iso-LSD is inactive at 4000 micrograms. That is hundreds of times more than what you'd find in a blotter or solution of LSD. If less than 10 micrograms could elicit a negative bodyload, a 400-fold overdose (or 400,000-fold, if we are to believe your claims about the only good LSD being 99,9% pure) should elicit *some* reaction, even in the sober state.

If you've got citations to back up your claims, then post them here, preferably with a link to the source. While I can't link to TIHKAL because it contains a synth recipe, I think everyone here should be capable of looking up the chapter on LSD.



That is just fluorescence, not magic. DayGlo will sell you buckets of stuff that does that.

Yet shuglin has hours and hours of talks open fourm public questions where he goes into everything indepth. Let alone nick sands and owesly hours of talks on youtube. Your putting claims into shulgins mouth on a little written quote saying iso-lsd is not psychoactive. That doesnt mean it has no physical effect your body has to remove that from your system. Your putting claims into LSD chemists mouth. Every LSD chemist who sells RAW LSD crystal lists the purity % and the body effects and differences. This has been known since the 60's

 

[Skorpio]

Just a thought experiment, what would happen if one laid blotter with melatonin and a phenethylamine? Wouldn't it pass the elrich test?

 

[TripSitterNZ]

Just a thought experiment, what would happen if one laid blotter with melatonin and a phenethylamine? Wouldn't it pass the elrich test?

It could. That is why its good to use multiple reagents to narrow down what is there.

 

[sekio]

The scientific literature strongly points towards iso-LSD being totally inactive. In fact it's present in the urine of users who use in the highly purified LSD capsules formulated for human trials. (reference)

LSD is inactivated to iso-LSD depending on temperature, solvent and pH and thus may be unstable in certain formulations. Other stress factors such as light, oxygen or tap water chlorine may also lead to decomposition of the LSD molecule. In fact, amounts of iso-LSD were detected in plasma in research sub-jects, indicating that approximately 30% of the LSD that was administered likely isomerized to inactive iso-LSD possibly within the LSD capsules that were used (Steuer et al., 2017).

So, iso-LSD is present in the urine of users who took "pure LSD". Hmm. That doesn't bode well for it being active.

David Nichols, noted hardline scholar who works with LSD, says in this paper:

The 8-position readily epimerizes to provide (+)-isolysergic acid diethylamide, which has about 30-fold lower affinity and is inactive as an hallucinogen. This transformation isfacile and occurs under slightly acidic pH

Now, if there's a source I trust on psychedelics, it's gonna have to be Nichols. He's like the law-abiding version of Sasha Shulgin. A brilliant scholar, even if he strictly colors inside the lines. That said, I could really care less what Owsley or Sand have to say if it conflicts with Nichols' publications. As smart as they are, and as much acid as they've taken, they are far from as objective and technologically-equipped than Nichols is. I trust the peer-reviewed hard numbers of binding affinities farther than I trust the recollection of the personal experiences of an ex-acid cook.

There are plenty of cases of "drug cooks" learning to make drugs (meth, PCP, LSD) while operating at a high-school-dropout level of knowledge. They know a recipe, they know what to look for and smell for, they know how not to do things, but never took a chemistry course, and have zero knowledge of what happens on a molecular level. They just know how to make product. Would you trust a cook like that to tell you about the activity of the side products? I wouldn't, if there were an academic telling me otherwise.

To me, iso-LSD is inactive, psychically and physiologically, and (I'd like to say) plays no role in my LSD experiences. (In fact, most people are ill-equipped to even detect the presence of iso-LSD - so how could they be certain about its pharmacology?)

Every LSD chemist who sells RAW LSD crystal lists the purity % and the body effects and differences.

Which doesn't mean the effects are going to be as stated, 100% of the time. This is similar to shampoo vendors talking about their tropical scent that will transport you to faraway paradise. It's just fucking soap at the end of the day.

I'm a very strong believer in molecular theory. That is to say, d-LSD tartrate is d-LSD tartrate, will behave like d-LSD tartrate, and can't take any other structure or form. If you have a blotter with LSD on it, it should behave just the same as any other blotter, microdot, or sugar cube with a similar dose on it. Set and setting are the variables to worry about.

 

[TripSitterNZ]

Nick sands and owsley when their LSD was tested by the academics with their heads up their own asses the dea saw it was 104% pure because the academic DEA chemists so called pure LSD reference was vastly less pure. LSD chemists know whats up and whats happen during synthesis large scale.

Anybody saying less has 1. no right to since they don't make LSD or even handle large amounts. 2. Have probably never gotten good LSD or have few experinces with different batches.

Buts it isn't only ISO that is a worry about its the entire purity of the LSD molecule and the way its handled. The purest forms of LSD never induce thought loops or nausea.

Nick sands and owesly labs were very equipped much so than even professional legitimate labs.

If you want to quote shulgin for science you should also know he believes he can move objects with his mind in the psychedelic state and control reality with his thoughts?

David Nichols is a smart man but he never has made or spread millions of hits of LSD like true LSD chemists. That synthesis and the stuff that truly goes on in the midst of making a molecule that itself will bend time and space around it without even going in your mouth. Albert hoffman knows it every LSD chemist that walked the earth knows it and anybody who has been around those circles have seen it. The whole synthesis of LSD is some parts very dedicated science then other parts universal karma. When you get hit with the power of thousands of UGs at once through a moon suit while making LSD then you truly know logical thought and science is out the window when trying to explain LSD.

 

[sekio]

The purest forms of LSD never induce thought loops

I'd call BS on that.

Buts it isn't only ISO that is a worry about its the entire purity of the LSD molecule and the way its handled.

So what sort of impurities are we talking of? Why are these impurities not documented as having even more potency than LSD (as would follow from a compound that effects the trip, but is dosed BELOW LSD) despite there being 80+ years of LSD chemistry since its discovery?

Are we going to fall into the same pit that the MDMA users are in? This idea that "some LSD is bad, some LSD is good, but they appear identical on testing" does not compute.

Nick sands and owesly labs were very equipped much so than even professional legitimate labs.

Well equipped, sure, but did Nick Sand have a HPLC-MS? A multi-hundred-Mhz NMR spec? Don't think so.

David Nichols is a smart man but he never has made or spread millions of hits of LSD like true LSD chemists.

Definitionally, he's a "true LSD chemist". He's made more than his fair share of LSD and its analogues (and has taught his students to do the same). The only difference is he did so within the confines of the law.

The whole synthesis of LSD is some parts very dedicated science then other parts universal karma.

It's just chemistry at the end of the day. No need for mysticism. LSD synthesis is established chemistry. And in fact, overall, LSD is not that difficult to manufacture to a chemist with sufficient experience. Especially in the modern age with the reagents available today. Making high purity LSD is really not too complex, assuming a few things: a source of ergot alkaloids, and a good hand at column chromatography. (the better labs use centrifugal chromatography). Hydrolyse the ergot alkaloids to get LA, then react with diethylamine and a coupling agent (Shulgin uses phosphoryl chloride, Scully used sulfur trioxide/pyridine aka "The Reagent", Casey Hardison used PyBOP, other methods: DCC, EDC, HATU, BOP, etc - most any peptide coupling agent works). Then chromatography over alumina to seperate the D-LSD, D-iso-LSD, unreacted lysergic acid, and coupling agent residue. D-iso-LSD is reacted with KOH to isomerize to D-LSD and re-chromatographed. Then the combined D-LSD base is treated with tartaric acid in methanol, and then recrystallized repeatedly until it's triboluminescent and analytically pure.


I've worked with LSD, not direct synthesis, but analytical work on blotters and LSD-analogs, using GCMS. I recall that basically all the LSD I recieved on blotter was effectively pure (hard to say for certain at the low loadings but easily >90% ) with very little iso-LSD if any. The few times iso-LSD was present, I dodn't notice a difference in trips.

And yes, I've eaten my fair share of acid. I've had the equivalent of a thumbprint when I popped a dozen or more tabs into my mouth one time I was spun on diphenidine. Then, I went grocery shopping

 

[TripSitterNZ]

95% vs 99.9% is where the come up is noticeable in negative side effects that level out once the peak hits. The lowest % that is even dosed onto blotter is usually 84% any less than is usually not found in mass amounts since the people making LSD anyway are aiming for purity.

The thing is that even the brother hood of eternal love members are on camera talking about the differences of quality LSD vs some of the low purity stuff in the 60's the sandoz vials never induced thought loops or strong nasuesa but this a argument that has gone on since the 60's and will never see the end.

Personally its still LSD the trip is still good infact i usually enjoy the 95% crystal more due to the less ultra clear headspace so i can trip out in time loops more. But it is true that 99.9% LSD the headspace is on another level it really shine the true power of the LSD headspace making people smarter on the trip connecting ideas and new forms of creativity rather than just tripping out and struggling to even speak.

I know alot of people are removed from spirit or thinking about mysticism but no one can explain the DMT hyperspace the breakthrough or what truly goes on in LSD. Albert hoffmans final take was that everybody that takes LSD enters another reality another world and tried to explain that in a logically science way.

But thumbprints ehh popping dozens of tabs and still been able to walk probably weak. Back in the 90's the average DEA analysed blotter was 35 ug each the people around the grateful dead where also only dosing vials at 80 ug a hit aswell after chemists quickly learn the mistakes of the 60s of dosing 270-300 ug hits.

But LSD is very very pure these days and usually dosed at 100 ug upwards of 200 ug and whatever the people want to lay their own blotters with raw crystal that can be bought by anybody these days. I was a borderline atheist before my first trip where i took 3 hits of white on white blotter which was probably 300 ug the whole death rebirth witness the infinite multiverse trip.

I know its hard to believe in mysticism around LSD but it was discovered for a reason and chemistry is the holy science of this universe to understand how reality works. But there many things beyond human understanding that flows in this field of energies.

We are not going to be MDMA users. LSD is LSD and will have you tripping this simply about some purity that is present in LSD that has not been recrystallized and chromographed that leads to a heavier come up with more nasuesa and a foggy head space til the peak cleans it up.