Bluelight

Thread: Define "Psychedelic"

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 112
  1. Collapse Details
     
    #26
    I am ok with calling Salvia and Datura deleriant hallucinogens rather than psychedelics.

    Still, I think it is in fact appropriate to macro-type. I think it is more appropriate than making up a new and more narrow/compplex definition for an already established general word.

    The Wikipedia article makes a good point though. Datura and Salvia are true hallucinogens but maybe not psychedelic hallucinogens.


    And yes, there are 5h2 agonists that are NOT psychedelic or hallucinogens.



    Should we split this?
    Reply With Quote
     

  2. Collapse Details
     
    #27
    Splitting it is probably a good idea if any mods feel so inclined. We're pretty far off topic.

    Anyway, I know there are agonists of 5-ht2 receptors that are not psychedelic, but are there any known full agonists of 5-ht2A receptors that are not psychedelic and conversely anything we would consider classically psychedelic that is not an agonist of this site? If there are I'd be interested in checking those out, if I could be pointed in the right direction.
    Reply With Quote
     

  3. Collapse Details
     
    #28
    I know there are antagonists and partial agonists of the 5HT2 receptors that are not psychedelic that include anti-anxiety drugs and migraine medicines.

    Strong agonism of these receptors certainly seems to produce psychedelic effects in most instances, but I still think psychedelic should be defined by the subjective experience of "mind manifesting" rather than by its mechanism of action.
    Reply With Quote
     

  4. Collapse Details
     
    #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Sentience View Post
    I know there are antagonists and partial agonists of the 5HT2 receptors that are not psychedelic that include anti-anxiety drugs and migraine medicines.

    Strong agonism of these receptors certainly seems to produce psychedelic effects in most instances, but I still think psychedelic should be defined by the subjective experience of "mind manifesting" rather than by its mechanism of action.
    Partial agonists and antagonists are a different sort of beast. I think the subjective experience is the critical part in defining it as well. However, if that happens to coincide with an objective measure, well that would wrap it up with a nice little red bow.
    Reply With Quote
     

  5. Collapse Details
     
    #30
    Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    drugpolicy.org/action
    Posts
    4,460
    Quote Originally Posted by Shakti View Post
    Anyway, I know there are agonists of 5-ht2 receptors that are not psychedelic, but are there any known full agonists of 5-ht2A receptors that are not psychedelic and conversely anything we would consider classically psychedelic that is not an agonist of this site? If there are I'd be interested in checking those out, if I could be pointed in the right direction.
    See here regarding 5-MeO-DMT:
    http://designer-drug.com/pte/12.162....1a.paradox.pdf

    In rats at least, when 5-MeO-DMT was administered, 5-HT1a antagonists but not 5-HT2a antagonists put in to block 5-MeO's effects on those respective receptors were shown to mediate stimulus control (lever presses for food). The 5-HT2a antagonists did antagonize stimulus control for DOM, though. 5-MeO-DMT does have activity at 5-HT2a, but it looks like it's not predominately responsible for its discernible effects in the rat.

    More evidence from a 2006 study: http://www.springerlink.com/content/571257851858223k/
    While the prevailing view was that the activation of 5-HT2 receptors is solely responsible for hallucinogenic drug effects, these results support a role for 5-HT1A receptors in the effects of the indoleamine hallucinogen 5-MeO-DMT on locomotor activity and PPI in rats.
    I'm not sure 5-MeO-DMT is what I'd call classically psychedelic, though. My one ego death experience with it was very similar to my two ego death experiences with DMT, a strong classical psychedelic, but because ego death is a type of "breakthough" experience and isn't something that can plausibly be argued to manifest in the sober mind (e.g. a forgotten childhood memory), it could be argued that it wasn't a psychedelic experience. It definitely had the "high perceptual gain" effect on return, though, where the environment seemed vivid and amplified. The character of these amplifying effects is far more characteristic of 5-HT psychedelics than other classes of drugs like dissociatives that seem to have psychedelic-like effects.
    Last edited by psood0nym; 08-12-2009 at 22:17.
    Reply With Quote
     

  6. Collapse Details
     
    #31
    Senior Moderator
    Neuroscience and Pharmacology Discussion
    Philosophy and Spirituality
    ebola?'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    situated in space-time
    Posts
    20,183
    Personally, I find it useful to anchor the definition to a common 'cognitive signature': a style of thought characterized by an increase in movement through structures of abstraction, including contradictions, self-undermining movements, etc.**, often coupled with a decrease in 'linear'* thought, particular of sensible causal relations set in time.

    Some may find this one too encompassing/exclusionary. Fine. Why do we require sign-signifier relations shared by all people for all contexts?

    I also like the attention to 'prototype'-style meaning-frameworks implicit in Jamshyd's take, as it provides a corrective to arguments analogous to those over whether mammals that lay eggs are indeed mammals, whether archeopteryx was 'really' a bird, etc.

    *god...I'm not quite sure what linear thought is. Perhaps something like navigating relations at either constant levels of abstraction or with some unrecognized changes in abstraction-level.
    **with some acrobatics, I think that ego loss fits in as the 'complete' extension of moving in such a sub-direction.
    Reply With Quote
     

  7. Collapse Details
     
    #32
    Bluelight Crew Jamshyd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Not on a train, sadly.
    Posts
    16,065
    Quote Originally Posted by Sentience View Post
    Still, I think it is in fact appropriate to macro-type. I think it is more appropriate than making up a new and more narrow/compplex definition for an already established general word
    I suppose, then, it is in fact appropriate to use the word "thing" to describe everything that exists? .
    Reply With Quote
     

  8. Collapse Details
     
    #33
    One of the difficulties with behavioral studies in animals is it lacks any analysis of the subjective component. You can't ask a rat if he was tripping. Therefore, you cant rule out the possibility that the 5-ht1a activity is responsible for outward expression of activity, but not the driving experiential activity. Though, the cross-comparison with DOM is strong evidence that 5-meo-dmt's mode of action is different. I haven't experienced 5-meo-dmt so I won't venture a guess as to if it is "classically psychedelic" or not.

    But, I can confirm that ego death can and does happen without the intervention of any substance of any kind. Don't have any data on that, that can be verified by anyone else. I just have to lean on my direct experience. Certainly it's proof enough for me, but the scientist in me doesn't expect anyone to take that assertion without skepticism. I don't know how a forgotten childhood memory plays into it though. Memories to me inherently imply some ego structure being present.

    Interesting info. Thanks for sharing.
    Reply With Quote
     

  9. Collapse Details
     
    #34
    Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    London Ont
    Posts
    959
    Its fucked up to say but i actually really enjoyed 5-meo-amt.
    to me it reminded me to Rolling on Lsd, only instead they were slightly more DMTesque visual
    at doses between 7-10mg i found the visuals could be just as organic and strange as DPT or n'n'dmt.
    There was also a persistant ecstasy//amphetamine buzz throughout the whole duration of the trip.

    The first time i did it i had terrible gut rot, but the the 2nd and 3rd time the toxic effects inside of my body seemed to be more minimal...

    It isn't a good psychedelic thats for sure.
    Reply With Quote
     

  10. Collapse Details
     
    #35
    Senior Moderator
    Neuroscience and Pharmacology Discussion
    Philosophy and Spirituality
    ebola?'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    situated in space-time
    Posts
    20,183
    Still off-topic:
    Quote Originally Posted by Sentience
    If a drug causes visual and auditory hallucinations then I think it fits the bill of what the root word of psyche-Delic's root definition inherently means. Manifestations from the mind. If it causes these visual and auditory projections of the mind to manifest themselves then its a psychedelic. . .
    ...
    Still, I think it is in fact appropriate to macro-type. I think it is more appropriate than making up a new and more narrow/compplex definition for an already established general word.
    I have qualms / 'got beef' :

    1. Why would we focus solely on sensoria as anchoring where 'mind' 'manifests'? (Somehow, Jamshyd's qualm remains bound with its converse.
    2. Per your definition, all of sober experience (including sensoria) involves the mind 'manifesting': we experience solely for ourselves in context, mind shaping its entire map of the world as the world shapes the mind that maps it (really, this is a single processural entity 'gazing' at itself). Most of this is unconscious.
    3. The pertinent concept of "mind manifesting" almost always bears Freudian or vaguely psychoanalytic assumptions of what in the mind by default contains as concealed, latent, a possible candidate to later manifest. The assumptions lack clear proof.

    Finally, that we are having this discussion at all, that this is controversial, points to a lack of an already established, general, and macrotypical word...except for exceptionally thin cases of words having been 'established'.
    Reply With Quote
     

  11. Collapse Details
     
    #36
    Oh, ebola? in point number 2 you say most of 'manifesting' is unconscious. So why would you in point 3 question concealed or latent unmanifest mind content? Of course there is a lack of clear proof. The 'proof' is inherently obscured, ie unconscious.

    To "manifest mind" is simply to bring content normally unconscious into consciousness. Everything that can be manifest into consciousness is 'sensible' and thus an aspect of sensoria. In that sense every single thing one could point to is manifesting mind, but some things do it dramatically and bring awareness to awareness itself. What used to be viewed as simply the 'seer' is shown to be but a mechanism of 'seeing'.

    Somehow, Jamshyd's qualm remains bound with its converse.
    Now that's a lucid deconstruction if I've ever seen one.
    Reply With Quote
     

  12. Collapse Details
     
    #37
    Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    drugpolicy.org/action
    Posts
    4,460
    Quote Originally Posted by Shakti View Post
    But, I can confirm that ego death can and does happen without the intervention of any substance of any kind. Don't have any data on that, that can be verified by anyone else. I just have to lean on my direct experience. Certainly it's proof enough for me, but the scientist in me doesn't expect anyone to take that assertion without skepticism. I don't know how a forgotten childhood memory plays into it though. Memories to me inherently imply some ego structure being present.
    The forgotten childhood memory is just something that is known to naturally manifest itself in the sober mind. Psychedelics bring out "hidden but real" aspects of the mind. Forgotten childhood memories are substantially more likely to be remembered due to the action of a psychedelic, as are previously unconscious feeling you may not have known you had, but nevertheless recognize as true. Ego death may be possible during sobriety, but it's hardly a common thing in the way recalling forgotten childhood memories is. It's not a hidden part of the sober mind made manifest, rather, it's of a qualitatively different order, as are all breakthrough experiences. That's why I distinguish the two.

    Yeah, we are WAY off topic. Only Psychonautical has been on topic lately, the rest should be split. On topic: I wonder if 5-MeO-aMT's "toxic" side effects would be largely removed by use of a selective 5-HT3 antagonist.
    Reply With Quote
     

  13. Collapse Details
     
    #38
    Somebody needs to step in and split this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by Shakti View Post
    To "manifest mind" is simply to bring content normally unconscious into consciousness. Everything that can be manifest into consciousness is 'sensible' and thus an aspect of sensoria. In that sense every single thing one could point to is manifesting mind, but some things do it dramatically and bring awareness to awareness itself. What used to be viewed as simply the 'seer' is shown to be but a mechanism of 'seeing'.
    Ebola made a good point that all reality is subjective and a projection of the mind on some level, but it certainly seems that some of our experience is a reflection of our senses while other experiences are a projection of the mind. I dont think that our interpretation of our senses is inherently psychedelic, though significant sensory changes that alters our experience of the world into another physical paradigm of reality probably is psychedelic.

    Ebola missed the part where I conceded that not all hallucinogens are necessarily psychedelic.

    Is DMT considered a classical psychedelic? If so, dreaming is a psychedelic experience. In dreaming we do in fact have access to information and experience that is not available to us in waking consciousness without being a zen master or under hypnosis. Many of the delerients may induce our bodies own natural psychedelics without having affinity for those receptors directly. If you can 'dream while awake'' how would you classify that experience?
    Reply With Quote
     

  14. Collapse Details
     
    #39
    Bluelight Crew Jamshyd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Not on a train, sadly.
    Posts
    16,065
    ^ and that is exactly why we need to make concrete, defined categories - otherwise no one really knows what the other is talking about. And after a lot of thought, I found that the best is having some degree of the empirical and some degree of the subjective together.

    I consider DMT to be a classic psychedelic, but I see very little in common between it and dreaming. Btw, what exactly are those endogenous psychedelics you speak of? Or are you under the assumption that DMT induces dreams?

    And I still would appreciate a response to my question re: the word "thing". Since all that exists is a thing, why bother with more definitionr?
    Reply With Quote
     

  15. Collapse Details
     
    #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamshyd View Post
    And I still would appreciate a response to my question re: the word "thing". Since all that exists is a thing, why bother with more definitionr?
    That sounds like hyperbol to me. I am not against creating new and more specific names and categories, but you cant single handedly change the definition of a more general word on a whim. The established definition of psychedelic is pretty broad and inclusive with some very general criteria. If you want to be more specific I think you can do so by creating increasingly specific sub-categories. 'Classical 5HT2 Psychedelic', or dissociative psychedelic would be descriptions of increasing specificity,

    Quote Originally Posted by Jamshyd View Post
    I consider DMT to be a classic psychedelic, but I see very little in common between it and dreaming. Btw, what exactly are those endogenous psychedelics you speak of? Or are you under the assumption that DMT induces dreams?
    I am going on the absolute medical fact that endogenous DMT is released naturally in the brain during birth/death and dreaming. When you fall asleep and enter REM sleep the brain has just released its own endogenous DMT.

    Lets compare two types of stimulants for an analogy with psychedelics. One stimulant stimulates the release of adrenaline from the adrenals and produces a stimulant effect, but is not directly an agonist to adrenaline receptors in the body. A second stimulant is an adrenaline analog and works on those receptors directly. They are both stimulants regardless of the lack of affinity the first chemical has with adrenaline receptors (I dont know their proper name).

    A chemical doesnt have to have to have direct affinity for a receptor to either be a pro-drug for a chemical that does or else indirectly release an endogenous chemical that does in fact fit into those receptors.

    Some of the deleriant psychedelics may contribute to the endogenous release of DMT, which also happens during REM sleep. They dont have to directly stimulate 5HT2 receptors to stimulate DMT or another such chemical which does.
    Reply With Quote
     

  16. Collapse Details
     
    #41
    Bluelight Crew Jamshyd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Not on a train, sadly.
    Posts
    16,065
    Quote Originally Posted by Sentience View Post
    That sounds like hyperbol to me. I am not against creating new and more specific names and categories, but you cant single handedly change the definition of a more general word on a whim. The established definition of psychedelic is pretty broad and inclusive with some very general criteria. If you want to be more specific I think you can do so by creating increasingly specific sub-categories. 'Classical 5HT2 Psychedelic', or dissociative psychedelic would be descriptions of increasing specificity,
    Maybe not a "hyperbole" per-se, but it IS an exaggeration to show you that I think your (and many psychedelics-users) "macro-typing" logic isn't exactly convenient.

    I am going on the absolute medical fact that endogenous DMT is released naturally in the brain during birth/death and dreaming. When you fall asleep and enter REM sleep the brain has just released its own endogenous DMT.
    References? Oh, and Strassman doesn't count .

    Lets compare two types of stimulants for an analogy with psychedelics. One stimulant stimulates the release of adrenaline from the adrenals and produces a stimulant effect, but is not directly an agonist to adrenaline receptors in the body. A second stimulant is an adrenaline analog and works on those receptors directly. They are both stimulants regardless of the lack of affinity the first chemical has with adrenaline receptors (I dont know their proper name).
    Your analogy is apples-to-oranges. You are talking about two drugs that work on the same transmitter system (regardless of direct-agonism or not). You also seem to be refering to the PNS, the effects of which are generally sensed only as increasing heart-rate, bronchodilation...etc., and not psychologically, which means that their effects can actually be measured completely via empirical means (ex. heart-rate).

    And even then, you are still talking about two different compounds, one a direct agonist, one that isn't, on the same transmitter system. That does not compare to talking about psychoactive substances whose effects cannot be measured completely using empirical means since there is a subjective component.

    [quote[A chemical doesnt have to have to have direct affinity for a receptor to either be a pro-drug for a chemical that does or else indirectly release an endogenous chemical that does in fact fit into those receptors.[/quote]

    No it doesn't, but you keep missing the fact that I synthesized TWO criteria, never one without the other.

    Some of the deleriant psychedelics may contribute to the endogenous release of DMT, which also happens during REM sleep. They dont have to directly stimulate 5HT2 receptors to stimulate DMT or another such chemical which does.
    I'd love to see references for all this. It seems now you're not only generalizing terms, but actually generalizing theoretical pharmacology. Not only can everything be called psychedelic, but apparently everything can also trigger some esoteric endogenous psychedelics indirectly.

    Sorry, but I just don't buy it
    Reply With Quote
     

  17. Collapse Details
     
    #42
    Bluelighter
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    drugpolicy.org/action
    Posts
    4,460
    Quote Originally Posted by Sentience View Post
    Is DMT considered a classical psychedelic? If so, dreaming is a psychedelic experience. In dreaming we do in fact have access to information and experience that is not available to us in waking consciousness without being a zen master or under hypnosis. Many of the delerients may induce our bodies own natural psychedelics without having affinity for those receptors directly. If you can 'dream while awake'' how would you classify that experience?
    The revealing "hidden but real aspects of the mind" part of the definition is just one part. To my understanding, for the definition to be useful in discussion it should describe common tendencies across users, statistical regularities. If we dig into it enough, we could contrive all sorts of ambiguous examples. Dreaming isn't a drug that we can administer, and dreams do not typically have the effects of widely agreed upon psychedelics across dreamers, therefore dreaming isn't psychedelic. Many have reported dreaming about being on psychedelic drugs and swear it feels the same, but that doesn't mean that a common characteristic of dreaming is to amplify and distort sensory and perceptual experiences the way a drug like LSD commonly does.

    There should be an empirical component to the definition of "psychedelic" (as opposed to, for example, "dissociative psychedelic"). The history of psychology shows that debating exclusively about subjective experiences goes nowhere. 5-MeO-DMT may present a problem on this side though, as early indications are that its effects are not predominately mediated by the same receptors that most other psychedelics are (see refs. in earlier post), yet experientially it is widely regarded as qualitatively highly similar to other 5-HT psychedelics like LSD and DMT (far more so than dissociative psychedelics are, for example).

    I'm not sure 5-MeO-DMT satisfies Jamshyd's empirical DOI similarity requirement. Perhaps a different empirical measure, such as corresponding patterns of brain blood flow in average participants in reaction to 5-MeO-DMT as well as predominately 5-HT2a-mediated psychedelics like DOM, as measured by fMRI, will supply the necessary empirical measure in future research. If 5-MeO-DMT is "psychedelic," for now all we can do is discuss what experiential regularities crop up in its use that are also commonly included in the experiences of drugs like DOI.
    Reply With Quote
     

  18. Collapse Details
     
    #43
    I get the feeling that I offended you by my rejection of your definition and criteria of the word psychedelic. This really isnt a personal issue for me and I hope it isnt for you either. Im engaging in this debate for nothing more than idle conversation and philosophical pontification. Its not like we are on opposite sides of some heated political issue, so I hope this doesnt get personal.

    Your analogy is apples-to-oranges. You are talking about two drugs that work on the same transmitter system (regardless of direct-agonism or not).
    Actually, it is apples to apples since that is exactly what I am saying may* happen in some instances. A hypothetical example of an alternative to direct agonism does not need solid proof either. The purpose is to present an alternative to direct agonism to show that there are other ways that psychedelic effects can be achieved.

    http://www.world-of-lucid-dreaming.com/dmt.html

    According to Dr Rick Strassman, author of DMT: The Spirit Molecule (soon to be a feature length movie), Dimethyltryptamine is a naturally occurring neurotransmitter similar in structure to serotonin. He theorizes that it is created in trace amounts by the pineal gland during normal metabolism, and may be released in massive amounts during birth, death, hallucinations and dreams.
    Reply With Quote
     

  19. Collapse Details
     
    #44
    Quote Originally Posted by psood0nym View Post
    The revealing "hidden but real aspects of the mind" part of the definition is just one part. To my understanding, for the definition to be useful in discussion it should describe common tendencies across users, statistical regularities. If we dig into it enough, we could contrive all sorts of ambiguous examples. Dreaming isn't a drug that we can administer, and dreams do not typically have the effects of widely agreed upon psychedelics across dreamers, therefore dreaming isn't psychedelic. Many have reported dreaming about being on psychedelic drugs and swear it feels the same, but that doesn't mean that a common characteristic of dreaming is to amplify and distort sensory and perceptual experiences the way a drug like LSD commonly does.

    There should be an empirical component to the definition of "psychedelic" (as opposed to, for example, "dissociative psychedelic"). The history of psychology shows that debating exclusively about subjective experiences goes nowhere. 5-MeO-DMT may present a problem on this side though, as early indications are that its effects are not predominately mediated by the same receptors that most other psychedelics are (see refs. in earlier post), yet experientially it is widely regarded as qualitatively highly similar to other 5-HT psychedelics like LSD and DMT (far more so than dissociative psychedelics are, for example).

    I'm not sure 5-MeO-DMT satisfies Jamshyd's empirical DOI similarity requirement. Perhaps a different empirical measure, such as corresponding patterns of brain blood flow in average participants in reaction to 5-MeO-DMT as well as predominately 5-HT2a-mediated psychedelics like DOM, as measured by fMRI, will supply the necessary empirical measure in future research. If 5-MeO-DMT is "psychedelic," for now all we can do is discuss what experiential regularities crop up in its use that are also commonly included in the experiences of drugs like DOI.

    I am not calling dreaming psychedelic, at least not normal dreaming while asleep. However, dreaming while awake, as can occur in odd states of altered consciousness, does produce visionary experiences like in the example of Salvia. I feel that these experiences fit the general dictionary definition of psychedelic and also may possible work indirectly on the 5HT receptors by inducing dreaming while awake. This is theory but it shouldnt be ruled out.

    Since we cannot understand the mechanism of all the drugs we take, I think its way more useful to look at it based on purely subjective criteria rather than based on chemical structure.

    What is psychedelic for one person might not be for another. What is psychedelic to one type of organism might not be to another. On chimps it might not have even close to the same effect....or it might.
    Reply With Quote
     

  20. Collapse Details
     
    #45
    http://dreamstudies.org/2009/07/07/a...s-psychedelic/

    Are Dreams the Original Psychedelic?

    During this night time process, our brains also use the hormone melatonin in producing compounds into serotonin which is further processed into tryptamine and pinoline (a known MAOI). When combining these nightly produced compounds, which is produced in the largest quantities during REM sleep, you have the possibility of creating one of the most potent psychedelics available in the world today, DMT.

    In layman’s terms, dreaming may naturally release the most powerful hallucinogen known to humankind.

    Here is a quote from Callaway (198 who explains the process in more technical terms:

    The pineal gland is a chemical production factory, either producing melatonin or serotonin depending on the presence of absence of light. In this process, light source information is relayed from the eyes via the optic nerves and results in the activation of synthesizers that either produces melatonin in the absence of light or serotonin in the presence of light, becoming the brains largest producer of serotonin. Also in the absence of light, other process are continued as melatonin is then processed into tryptamine and pinoline. Pinoline is a beta-carbolin called 6-Methoxytetrahydro-beta-carboline and acts as a monoamine oxidase-A inhibitor (MAOI) which in turn allows for the increases concentrations of serotonin (Callaway, 198.

    http://ionatopia.50megs.com/whats_new_8.html

    Until roughly age 8, we can’t really distinguish between fantasy and reality, due to our own natural hallucinogen, DMT, (dimethyltryptamine). DMT molecules are similar to serotonin and target the same receptors. Meditation has been suggested as a means of preserving youthful appearance and mental flexibility. It has also been suggested by Dr. Rick Strassman and others as a spiritual technology that encourages production and release of natural DMT in the mindbody throughout the lifespan.

    DMT is implicated in the wild imaginings of our nightly dreams, near-death phenomena (NDEs), and alien abduction experiences. It is also asource of visionary phenomena in therapy, such as unusual psychophysical states attained in shamanic or psychotherapeutic journeys. Synthetic DMT crosses the blood-brain barrier and bonds to the same synaptic sites as serotonin. Psychedelic chemist, Sasha Shulgin claims, “DMT is everywhere.”

    The principal difference between dreams and hallucinations is the way the stages of wakefulness are organized, with the suppression of REM sleep and the intrusion of PGO waves in the arousal (waking) stage and in NREM (or slow) sleep.
    "The principal difference between dreams and hallucinations is the way the stages of wakefulness are organized, with the suppression of REM sleep and the intrusion of PGO waves in the arousal (waking) stage and in NREM (or slow) sleep."

    This is what I was getting at. What makes wakeful dreaming a psychedelic compared to regular sleep is the stages of wakefulness during the experience.


    And yet another source commenting on the dreaming DMT connection.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/21501655/B...ry-Project-DMT
    Reply With Quote
     

  21. Collapse Details
     
    #46
    Bluelighter Delta-9-THC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    1,040
    I am going on the absolute medical fact that endogenous DMT is released naturally in the brain during birth/death and dreaming. When you fall asleep and enter REM sleep the brain has just released its own endogenous DMT.
    Sentience, I don't think any of the sources you gave in anyway prove that DMT is released during dreaming, death, and birth as a medical fact. They all say "MAY". On pretty flimsy terms as well.

    It is just a theory. Strassman is in several ways biased and quite unscientific in his theorizing. Personally I don't really think dreams are in anyway DMT like other than the fact that the total range of sensory experiences are produced by both. In other words, they both create fully realized and complete sensory experiences/hallucinations. Other than this fact I find them to be nothing alike qualitatively.

    We really don't know where, how, or why DMT is produced in our brain.
    Reply With Quote
     

  22. Collapse Details
     
    #47
    That is right. I could be mistaken about DMT definitely being released during dreaming. Its been repeated so many times that I just took it for granted. The other sources suggest that it is a very plausible theory but not a fact.

    Whether the example is fact or theory/hypothesis, it is still apples to apples and a valid model of an alternative route of activation of the 5HT receptors.

    When I smoke Salvia I see visions and fractals and witness other worlds before my eyes. I think most people who dont get too technical with labeling drugs by chemical structure would lump that kind of experience in with psychedelics, and it definitely seems to fit the most basic dictionary definition of a psychedelic. It is also possible that it could stimulate those receptors indirectly even if they are not agonists themselves.

    We do seem to have DMT in our brain though, and we are pretty sure it is produced in the pineal gland. We dont know what role it plays but it is widely believed that it may play a role in the near death experience and many speculate that it is secreted during dreaming. If so, drugs which induce a waking dream state might work by using the bodies own psychedelics not necessarily limited to DMT.



    It looks like there was already a discussion about endogenous DMT production in the brain here on bluelight.

    http://www.bluelight.ru/vb/showthread.php?p=7811684
    Reply With Quote
     

  23. Collapse Details
     
    #48
    Quote Originally Posted by psood0nym View Post
    The forgotten childhood memory is just something that is known to naturally manifest itself in the sober mind. Psychedelics bring out "hidden but real" aspects of the mind. Forgotten childhood memories are substantially more likely to be remembered due to the action of a psychedelic, as are previously unconscious feeling you may not have known you had, but nevertheless recognize as true. Ego death may be possible during sobriety, but it's hardly a common thing in the way recalling forgotten childhood memories is. It's not a hidden part of the sober mind made manifest, rather, it's of a qualitatively different order, as are all breakthrough experiences. That's why I distinguish the two.
    Yes, I think it is of a completely separate order as well. That's why I thought the comparison was odd. But, now I see the parallel you were drawing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sentience View Post
    Ebola made a good point that all reality is subjective and a projection of the mind on some level, but it certainly seems that some of our experience is a reflection of our senses while other experiences are a projection of the mind. I dont think that our interpretation of our senses is inherently psychedelic, though significant sensory changes that alters our experience of the world into another physical paradigm of reality probably is psychedelic.
    That's one way to skin a cat. But my point was that anything we can experience is an aspect of sensoria. The conscious mind (as opposed to the unconscious mind) is an aspect of sensoria, as it can be sensed, observed and responded to. So any thing catalyzed into mind manifested by a psychedelic (or anything else for that matter) has entered into sensoria.


    OK, so... Just want to see if we're all on the same page here. The term Hallucinogen is reserved for the over-arching group of substances which produce subjective experiences of the type or order we speak of. Psychedelic is reserved for direct agonists of serotonin receptors which produce the associated subjective experiences we speak of. Any division as to which specific serotonin receptor sites compounds activate can be considered a future sub-division of psychedelic. There are several types of dissociatives, and I'm not really fluent with them. So, I'll let someone else define or classify them and their sub-types. But, we agree that dissociatives are a sub-group of hallucinogen that is separate and distinct from psychedelics? Deliriants are a third distinct sub-type of hallucinogen. I'm not certain of how we want to classify these. I can't say I know much about them other than that scopolamine and atropine act on acetylcholine receptors.

    OK, so what have I missed (besides a lot)?
    Last edited by Shakti; 09-12-2009 at 18:08.
    Reply With Quote
     

  24. Collapse Details
     
    #49
    Moderator
    The Lounge
    Roger&Me's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    LoPro for DexBro
    Posts
    19,533
    Quote Originally Posted by Sentience View Post
    I am going on the absolute medical fact that endogenous DMT is released naturally in the brain during birth/death and dreaming. When you fall asleep and enter REM sleep the brain has just released its own endogenous DMT.
    That's about as much an "absolute medical fact" as saying the brain releases morphine when you eat a banana. In other words, not a medical fact at all.

    Truth of the matter is that we have no idea what role, if any, DMT plays in our neurochemistry. All we know for a fact is that small quantities of DMT are present in our spinal fluid. IMO (and again-- just my opinion) I highly doubt that endogenous DMT has any role in regulating any biological processes; if I were to speculate, I would say the most likely explanation is that DMT is an inactive by-product of the complex enzymatic synthesis of monoamines.

    Its understandable how one could misconstrue Strassman's conjecture as fact, as Strassman does a great job of subtly presenting his speculations as fact while simultaneously maintaining the official stance that it is indeed merely conjecture. I think its mainly the highly enthused psychonauts who repeat the claims of endogenous DMT's activity as fact in conversation, which proliferates the misunderstanding.

    But honestly, I think that douche Joe Rogan has done more to proliferate this myth than anyone else. If I see another youtube video showcasing Joe Rogan's inane ramblings on the subject, I swear I'll permanently morph into one of these little guys:
    Reply With Quote
     

  25. Collapse Details
     
    #50
    Hey, I already admitted that I was wrong about it being a fact.

    There certainly seem to be endogenous chemicals that fit into the 5HT2 receptors though. Inhibiting these receptors certainly seems to block actions in the brain, even in the absence of drug use. I think its safe to assume that endogenous stimulation of these receptors can in theory be stimulated by drugs which are not direct agonists of those receptors.


    I think a lot of that makes sense. I am ok with using hallucinogen as the broader category for the sake of discussions here and using psychedelic as a more specific subdivision of hallucinogen. I dont think the definitions floating around here are universally accepted or codified, but I can work with them if that is the local dialect here.

    I do think that the divisions are not always 100% cut and dry though. I tend to be very taoist in thinking that things contain their opposites and often share characteristics. I also think that an indirect stimulation of 5HT2 receptors can produce an experience is that no less psychedelic to the end user even though its using endogenous chemicals to achieve this. I think a powerful hypnosis could potentially produce a true psychedelic experience, though it wouldnt be a 'psychedelic drug'.
    Reply With Quote
     

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •