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

LSD Synthesis

Status
Not open for further replies.
And I hate to tell you guys that there are many chemists out there outside of this 'family' that you all so affectionately refer to that can make cid. It really is not that hard.
Click to expand...

there are probably thousands of people with the knowledge to synth lsd but they don't. most of them probably aren't even into drugs at all. just having the knowledge and capabilities is only half of the process if that. you have to know where to get et which would more than likely be out of country, then smuggle it in, also alot of places that will sell et are very friendly with the US government and will report you and you'll be caught before you even attempt to make lsd. you have to get the equipment ect. If so many people other than the family make lsd how come national supply basically follows what's going on with them? i.e. prichard was busted and opens his mouth and everyone goes into hiding = the drout that we are still emerging from today if you remember lsd was alot easier to find before that happened.

killarava-psych@delic was right about alot of stuff he said no matter how illegible it was, when laying blotter you get spun so I'd imagine you'd be trippin your ass off after you sucessfully synth it, you could easily breath in enough lsd to trip, or just get a little on your skin or anything.
 
To me, LSD-25 chemical was not a coincedence. Maybe a physical accident that led to its discovery... but not a 'real' accident. Our country needed that drug to spark the fire that it did. And it couldn't have come at a better time.

There's no point to really argue the points in this post, simply because its laughable how many people seem to think making LSD is not hard. It's some extremely advanced chemistry that even *VERY* skilled chemists need to work at. So just to add some input on a couple other points:

- 1 Pound of LSD = ~454 Grams of LSD
That's 454,000,000 mics, or (let's say) 4,500,000 Standard Doses. 4.5 million hits is definitely enough to 'satiate' Acid users in America - AS LONG as it's spreading around thoroughly. So Psych@delic is correct for sure I'd say...

- Almost every person I have talked to (or, read about) that has handled extremely large doses of LSD, either messing with the actual synthesis, laying blotter, or even having < 1 Gram of crystal around them.... has stated that they do indeed get fairly high just from the tiny contact that takes place. There is no way around it sometimes if you are going to be dealing with such large amounts.

- Stryc is definitely 'mostly' a myth. Here is an excerpt from this page here.

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 Hoffman 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.



And just one more thing - to those saying they would have, or know how, to synthesize LSD: Where the hell are you going to get the thousands of dollars of laboratory materials, many of which are looked-for going in and out of America (by the feds and the like), and then score all of the initial chemicals/elements you need for production? If you look at the prerequisite materials, you'll see some of the ones Im talking about.
 
Using modern methods, I can reassure people that a 2 step route with over 50% yield is available. You don't need toxic OR controlled chemicals. The biggest myth is that diethyl amine is hard to get. Well, diethyl formamide + NaOH gives 100% yield of it. DEF is EASY to get...
 
Piglet -> I assume you allude to the use of coupling reagents. In so far, I haven't heard of it's actual APPLICATION. I however find it very innacurate of you to claim that you don't need toxic or controlled chemicals. Diethylamine isn't exactly something I'd love to be swimming in. Could you possibly list what reagents you would be referring to? As per the 2-step, do you refer to US Patent 4524208? Also, the diethylformamide + NaOH is not 100% (nothing is). I believe it is equilibrium governed, and even if not, purification will drop your yields anyways.
 
And what side-products would you expect? Also, how to shift that equilibrium? Well, what's the BP of DEA? OK, it's a 99%+ reaction! Also, HBTU HAS been used & PyBOP used for some analogues (isobutyl amine). Cabergoline synthesis is a GOOD place to look. Actually, it's a 3-stepper including saponification...
 
BTW there's toxic and there's toxic. I already mentioned the compounds I consider risky. DEA is smelly, but an extractor fan & fume hood work fine. You messed with SO3 or N2H4? Instant lungfuck & cancer with the latter. That's toxic! I wouldn't 'swim' in most any chemical, so it doesn't worry me... do you?
 
^^ Good stuff guys. I don't have much to add except to say that newer methods referred to, are indeed more simple than the original synthesis.


But from a synthesis perspective, even Hofmann's from through lysergic acid is not all that difficult providing you have GC/MS or a fancy new HPLC, and a bit of other important equipment. But certainly nothing you wouldn't find in a Uni Org Chem lab. The reality is, that as mentioned, it requires some knowledge of the chemistry involved - much more so than the haphazard approach often seen with reducing ephedrine to meth - but nothing much above graduate level. The most dangerous part would be handling the final product and any ergot compounds needed; amides etc. Very toxic

It was once stated on an old LSD FAQ that a chemist with a few thousand $ worth of equipment, could produce around 60 million hits over a few days. If those figures are anywhere near close, it becomes apparent that a pound or so could be knocked up in one lab over a short period.
 
Piglet --> VERY interesting. I just have found little information on this being carried out (w/ HBTU, and BOP and other such reagents). I can see the possibility for very high (in comparison) yields if carried out with a little care. Do you have any possible links to abstracts, experimentals, et al that you could possibly share which involve someone actually performing the reaction w/ yeild values and such? And my worries mainly stem from a lack of fumehood, but if I had access to a proper lab, there would be little worry (we've all dealt with worse :p).
 
LSD synthesis. Definately not the most difficult synth. In a well stocked lab it is complicated but not impossible. In a clandistine lab it is really freaking difficult.

Earning my chem degree taught me that i am NOT ready to make LSD. I might try it at the pharm. lab i worked at last year, but that shit had amazing equipment. If i were trying to make my own from scratch from stolen equipment and chemicals I know i wouldn't be trying no matter what people were offering me.

Also, having a BS in chemistry definately does not prepare someone for this synthesis. It helps, but without some decent extracurricular organic chemistry labwork (research or otherwise) many people will not be able to complete this synth.
 
Nevertheless a good read though.

Btw I think ET (ergotamine tartrate) is the best way to
go for the best yields in obtaining a pure product of LSD.

I think Shulgin was able to pull off 3 grams of LSD for
10 grams of ET.

then there's MGS or HWRS but I believe, under extraction
they only produce LSA which has to be converted into LSD.

With ET you can directly acuire LSD from extraction (correct
me if im wrong)

but obtaining ET in the US or possibly around
the globe legally is nil without a bit of surveillance
on your back.

FOR THE LOVE OF ACID!!!!!!!!PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!!COME!!!!!!!!!!!HOME!!!!!!!!
oops did i just say that...?

mods note - edited for content, PM me if you wish to know why - atlas
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ergotamine is NOT the best start material. Cabergoline is commercially available and leads to a legal & stronger analogue. BOP leaves some toxic shit, hence PyBOP. More expensive, but lots safer. HBTU is also toxic so go with the PyBOP. Trade secrets prevent me from revealing my route but anyone with the asbility to make it will easily find a good 3 stepper from simple, essy to buy compounds. The mild conditions means that no isoLSD is formed.
Forget ALL published books (even Shulgin) and go for the journals. Perdue is the home of the chemistry....
BTW DEA isn't THAT watched. I also invite interested parties to consider other amides & substitution of the 8 nitrogen. Just don't use the Hoffman degredation; Ethyl chloroformate is NUCH better.
 
^^^^^^
Everything piglet mentions is news to me. It seems like clandestine LSD production is far below the radar.

What methods were those 2 guys who got busted with 90 lbs of LSD crystal using?
 
abazabaa said:
What methods were those 2 guys who got busted with 90 lbs of LSD crystal using?
Click to expand...

I believe the pickard bust involved the use of ET. the 90 pounds
of LSD acuired is false. I think it was one pound of LSD and the
rest were just precursors that was actually consficated.

don't take my word for it, read here for yourself.

http://www.freepickard.org/
 
Piglet said:
Ergotamine is NOT the best start material. Cabergoline is commercially available and leads to a legal & stronger analogue. BOP leaves some toxic shit, hence PyBOP. More expensive, but lots safer. HBTU is also toxic so go with the PyBOP. Trade secrets prevent me from revealing my route but anyone with the asbility to make it will easily find a good 3 stepper from simple, essy to buy compounds. The mild conditions means that no isoLSD is formed.
Forget ALL published books (even Shulgin) and go for the journals. Perdue is the home of the chemistry....
BTW DEA isn't THAT watched. I also invite interested parties to consider other amides & substitution of the 8 nitrogen. Just don't use the Hoffman degredation; Ethyl chloroformate is NUCH better.
Click to expand...

This is a BOLD statement, if you are speaking from experience then
WOW!! my hat's off to ya.
 
making sid is easy... if u hav LSA, but thats hard to get... unless u hav a hawaiian baby woodrose plantation.... thats actually sposed to be better than ET... some supliers sell it even in huge quantity.
 
If you have HBWS seeds you end up with a myriad of different LSAs (lysergic acid amides). LSA doesn't not exactly refer (usually) to a single chemical. Also, if so, what is it that you say it refers to as a single chemical, and it's usefulness in the synth. Also, would you put faith in your ability to synth it? How would you purify (TLC, recrystallizations, distillation of the freebase?).
 
did u mean what purpose LSA makes to the production of LSD... and HBWR seeds contain about 80% LSA from all the other alkaloids in em. and i didnt say it would be good cid, itd hav iso-lsd too, i bet.... but u turn ET's amides into LSA... so thats how its necessary
 
let me spell it out for you psych@delic:

LSA is not the name of a particular chemical, it is an abreviation of "Lysergic acid Amides". It is clear to those around you know not of what you speak. Are you perhaps referring to LA-111?
 
At least someone seems to realize this (atlas :p). I was acting on the assumption that someone who cannot seem to differentiate chemically between the many LSA's (lysergic acid amides) found in some seed varieties, and a pure compounds wouldn't be able to perform the synth. Also, you react ET to produce lysergic acid hydrate, which to my knowledge is not referred to as LSA. Even IF it is abbreviated as LSA, it is NOT referring to the many LSA's found in HBWS. It would not be sensible or viable to form LSD from an extract of HBWS. Sorry psych@delic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top