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

☮ Social ☮ PD Social: Cross-dimensional chatter. Now featuring mesphereomeantoliopeme.

Status
Not open for further replies.
found it interesting to read that BL started out as an ecstacy based forum from the 90s ? BL does seem to be erowid's go-to forum, i have seen a variety of links to BL from erowid.

just watched Dirty Pictures, and I enjoyed it a lot. Its honestly one of the best films concerning psychedelic drugs that I've ever seen.

yes i watched it a couple times ! you know when you see a film and then the next time you see something you missed the first time ....... ?? just wish there was more the shulgins and less others, but then i found a "lunch with the shulgins" interview, it was sweet to watch at midday http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrGM2_G1Wro

SKL said:
Psychedelic Experience is a genuine classic, whatever one might think about Leary

i opened it up and read a nice line "have faith and trust in the billion-year-old life process" it's stuck in my head since
 
Rog, explain in terms i could understand...
SKL mentioned pesticides or something as impurities in LSD...what chems is he talking about? Wat pesticides.
I'd rather have/would probably feel a bit safer doing drogs "made with drain cleaner and battery acid" than doing a drug that's literally got poison as an impurity..
does most LSD have nasty pesticide impurities?
Am i safe in assuming there is no real risk of adverse health effects from impurities in LSD?
 
Hey PD!

Hey guys,

I just watched Dirty Pictures, and I enjoyed it a lot. Its honestly one of the best films concerning psychedelic drugs that I've ever seen.

Here's the link, if you're interested: http://vimeo.com/29358948

If you enjoy the movie, try to purchase a copy of the DVD at some point (its available now through Barns&Noble online). These guys made a great documentary and deserve to be compensated for producing such a high-quality product.

Take care, all! :) <3

They had a screening in SF last month. Ann had posted on Caringbridge a few days before that they'd be on stage to take questions, but I don't think Sasha was feeling up to it. I definitely recommend the documentary, despite the fact that it felt a bit disjointed at times...loved the scene with Dave at the COSM party! He seems like an incredibly warm and friendly person.

On another note, anybody know how nearjat is doing? Haven't seen him around lately.
 
Thought I'd share some pics from a recent Yosemite visit...maybe I'll inspire a few to make it out there.

yosemite1832.jpg


panorama022.jpg
 
Last edited:
I really hate how some people wrongly correlated low serotonin with depression and negative emotions. All evidence suggests that lower serotonin actually means more of both spectrums of emotion - so yes, negative emotions will be stronger, but so will positive ones. I was thinking about it, because my emotions have been swinging back and forth today, probably because of the 6-APB I ingested 2 days ago, but I see it as an absolutely positive thing rather than a bad thing, my emotions are so much more open - sure, sad things make me feel really bad, but I'd rather that than be numb to them - and on the flip side, every little nice thing I see, whether it be a smile, some nice art, or just a nice post here - they all leave me with a state of warm happiness and bliss <3

I think this is why SSRIs are effective for some and not for others. For people with bi-polar disorder and the like where emotions are amplified to an extreme, with both their extreme manic phases and their depressive phases - SSRIs which raise serotonin and dull emotional responses could be perfect. I really hate how they're prescribed for general depression and anxiety though, all evidence suggests it'll only make these conditions worse, and the only relief you'll get is a temporary dulling of the pain - but a dulling of the happiness that could be the key to getting you out of your depression too.

I had a depressive/suicidal stage, and the only reason I got out of it was because I accepted we all experience sadness, and it was a few key moments of overwhelming happiness that made me just say "Screw it, the sad moments are worth it", and I've never gone back to that sadness since. If someone has this chance to experience such bliss taken away from them by SSRIs and the like their depression could end up being permanent.
 
I really hate how some people wrongly correlated low serotonin with depression and negative emotions. All evidence suggests that lower serotonin actually means more of both spectrums of emotion - so yes, negative emotions will be stronger, but so will positive ones. I was thinking about it, because my emotions have been swinging back and forth today, probably because of the 6-APB I ingested 2 days ago, but I see it as an absolutely positive thing rather than a bad thing, my emotions are so much more open - sure, sad things make me feel really bad, but I'd rather that than be numb to them - and on the flip side, every little nice thing I see, whether it be a smile, some nice art, or just a nice post here - they all leave me with a state of warm happiness and bliss <3


I get these sort of intensified emotional reactions whenever I end periods of daily/very frequent GABAergic use. Which makes sense, of course. I rather like it.
 
JesusGreen said:
... I think this is why SSRIs are effective for some and not for others. For people with bi-polar disorder and the like where emotions are amplified to an extreme, with both their extreme manic phases and their depressive phases - SSRIs which raise serotonin and dull emotional responses could be perfect ...

Sorry, you're off base here. SSRI's need to be used in caution with bipolar people, because they can cause manic reactions.

Very true that it's not as simple as "low serotonin = depression," this theory is pretty outmoded and was basically just Big Pharma marketing, but low serotonin isn't in anyway a good thing, and it's not really associated with exaggerated emotional extremes or bipolarity.
 
What I'm currently working on - the esotericPharma article on Ayahuasca, to be part of our Wiki, which is currently under development (open to members, and if you're interested, lmk).

Comments are especially welcomed on this one because this is not my area of expertise, having never taken it (from what I understand about the experience, it doesn't really interest me, but culturally & pharmacologically, it's fascinating, culturally, mostly in a scary way, at least as far as what's happening in America with it over the past few years. I'm going to get into this int he Article but haven't yet ...)

This is about the first 1/2 to 1/3 of the article, covering basic pharmacology & botany, there will be more on culture, nature of the experience, more botany probably, etc. etc.

Ayahuasca

NSFW:

Ayahuasca, also called yage or hoasca, in popular usage (as a term for a drug), refers to a traditional South American decoction of two or more particular psychoactive plants, which in combination produce potentially profound psychedeic effects which are "greater than the sum of it's parts," as a very particular pharmacological process. In essence, coadministration of DMT along with an MAO inhibitor allows for the DMT to pass from the digestive system into the bloodstream, and from there into the brain, where it can exert it's psychedelic effects. Oral administration of DMT without inhibition of MAO causes has no discernible psychotropic effect, due to the fact that the enzyme MAO-A is present in the GI tract and leads to the total breakdown of any DMT encountered there.

The use of ayahuasca predates, probably by many centuries, the arrival of Westerners on the American continent, and was developed by the indigenous peoples there as part of their shamanic religious practices. These groups would make decoctions of several plants endemic to the regions they inhabited. Most properly the term ayahuasca refers to the vine Banisteriopsis caapi, the essential ingredient, but, rather confusingly, the term is also used in reference to psychedelic drug decoctions, or "brews." The most traditional preparations, generally speaking, use B. caapi, and, pars pro toto, the term is used for the brew itself, which is by definition a mixture of several different constituents in addition to B. caapi, one of which would typically contain DMT.

While B. caapi does have some intrinsic psychoactive, or perhaps even psychedelic, properties, the most remarkable effects of ayahuasca are due to the concomitant administration of at a number of alkaloids from at least two different plants. This is particularly remarkable because the concomitant administration of these psychoactive drugs was obviously arrived upon without any knowledge of the pharmacological processes involved, a fact which has engendered much metaphysical speculation. This speculation, while it may feed a certain need in some quarters for a supernatural paradigm upon which to base the psychedelic experience, in some ways denigrates the equally remarkable truth that even "primitive" societies can possess a great deal of botanical knowledge, and, through a "trial and error" process over generations, could arrive at a combination of plants with a truly remarkable effect, and, knowing a good thing when they saw it, pass on and perpetuate the knowledge involved in preparing it.

Generally speaking, to be properly termed ayahuasca, the brew plant most contain at least two pharmacologically and botanically distinct parts. The traditional constituents are as follows: first, a source of MAO inhibiting alkaloids, most often harmine (T14) and harmaline (T13), which role is played by B. caapi in the archetypical brew, and second, a plant which contains DMT, which will be activated, or more properly, allowed to enter the bloodstream, and have it's neuropsychopharmacology markedly changed, by the MAO inhibitor. A variety of plant sources of DMT have been used, both traditionally and more recently, as the second constituent in ayahuasca decoctions. The most traditional is Psychotria viridis, which is called "chacruna," said to derive from a word in the Quechua language meaning "to mix," as in, to mix with ayahuasca.

It is important to note that the specific constituents of the preparation can vary widely between sources, for reasons of availability, expediency, personal preference, and even deliberate deceit (there are instances where unscrupulous individuals have made "brews," so-called, containing not the expected psychoactive plants but rather one or more research chemicals holding at best a tangential chemical and pharmacological relationship to the traditional ingredients.) Even in the most traditional settings, ayahuasca has never been a set "recipe" but rather a sort of psychoactive "Stone Soup" containing any number of different plants, and thus, any number of different alkaloids.

Even the most orthodox traditional usage can turn the term "ayahuasca" into a wide umbrella. A wide variety of plants have been reported as being utilized as part of ranging from relatively equivalent DMT-containing alternatives ("Mimohuasca" using M. hostilis, etc.) to plants which contain other drugs, such as Diplopterys cabrerana (also called Banisteriopsis rusbyana), which contains 5-MeO-DMT in addition to DMT. Drugs with rather different pharmacological properties, ranging from psychedelic mushrooms, also tryptamines and also dramatically changed in their effects when administered with an MAO inhibitor (although, unlike DMT, this coadministration is not necessary in order to achieve oral activity), to atropine and scopolamine containing plants from the Nightshade family, e.g. Datura spp., which have a very different sort of "hallucinogenic," effect, more properly called a deleriant or psychotomimetic effect, and even Nicotiana rustica, a plant of the tobacco family high in nicotine.

Whether a brew may contain additional ingredients, without being advertised as such, and still be legitimately called the name, is a controversial topic which is beyond our scope, but for anyone who is considering consuming ayhausca not made by themselves, it is exceedingly important to be aware of the potential for variability. The practice of so-called "shamans" who provide individuals with doses of "ayahuasca," so called, without an explanation of the constituent ingredients, and include ingredients which go beyond the usual pair (MAO inhibitor and DMT source) is reprehensible in the extreme, not to mention potentially dangerous. We can even imagine scenarios in which it would be life-threatening.

Simple variance in the source of DMT, which is present in a wide variety of plants, is unlikely to cause major qualitative changes in the nature of the experience, provided that the quantity of plant material that is used in the brew is proportional to the concentration of the active alkaloid, as obviously otherwise an over- or under-dose of DMT would occur relative to the dose of the MAO inhibitor, resulting in an experience that is either too strong or two weak. One hypothetical concern is that if the concentration of DMT were lower than expected, relative to the amount of MAO inhibitor, an excess dose of the latter might be consumed. If this Erowid report is to be believed, such an experience can be quite physically distressing, and hallucinogenic in it's own right, however rather not in a pleasant way. Not much is known about extreme overdose of B. caapi, P. harmala, and the like, and while an educated guess might suggest that they would be safer than an overdose of, say, moclobemide or phenelzine, this is uncertain and potentially dangerous territory.

Furthermore, even if the botanical constituents are held constant, between different plant specimens of the same species, alkaloidal concentration can vary to a rather significant degree, as can the ultimate alkaloidal content of the decoction, based upon a variety of factors involved in it's preparation. One "serving" of ayahuasca may vary wildly in it's strength from one preparation to another, even prepared by the same person, and the same process, and from the same sources. This is a problem which is by no means specific to ayahuasca, but rather, is an immutable fact when dealing with plant drugs in their raw form. A skilled preparer of ayahuasca will be aware of this fact and take what amount to harm reduction measures to ensure that those consuming it do so in the safest way possible, minimizing the chance of overdose. Often, in "ceremonies" open to the general public, the initial dose is relatively weak, and a second dose, or even more, is offered once the effects of the first become apparent. It is important to note that in this instance, MAO has already been inhibited to one degree or another, so one can expect a non-linear relationship between the strength of the first and the second dose, as with the first dose it is likely that some of the DMT contained therein is lost, broken down by the GI system, before the MAO inhibitors, which are taken simultaneously, take effect. Sometimes, particularly with pharmahuasca (the combination of DMT and an MAO inhibitor in synthetic or extracted alkaloidal form rather than as raw plant material), although this deviates from the traditional model, the MAO inhibitor is taken some time prior to the DMT, in order to take advantage of the maximal inhibition of MAO.

/unfinished/
 
^You beat me to it (response to JG). ;)

SSRIs aren't miracle drugs by any means, but the opposite view that they are terrible is equally incorrect. JG, your point about temporary relief and making things worse in the long run applies quite well to benzodiazepines, but not necessarily SSRIs. The evidence is pretty good that SSRIs help with anxiety and depression, particularly in more severe cases, though the best treatment is to combine with psychotherapy and eventually taper off the drugs.
 
I don't think the "evidence" is really that good, TBH. Some studies show they (SSRIs) aren't better than placebo. Some show otherwise. So, really, we don't know. But what I find most troubling about SSRI's is that they are so hard to get off of for a significant subset of the people who take them. I really disagree with them being first line a/d's, I prefer buproprion for that. Even some of the old tricyclics I think are much superior to SSRIs. But, without a doubt, they help some people, but I think more people just continue to take them because they are so hard to stop, long after any putative benefit has ceased.
 
LSDMDMA&10108464 said:
Rog, explain in terms i could understand...

You should look it up.

SKL mentioned pesticides or something as impurities in LSD...what chems is he talking about? Wat pesticides.
I'd rather have/would probably feel a bit safer doing drogs "made with drain cleaner and battery acid" than doing a drug that's literally got poison as an impurity..
does most LSD have nasty pesticide impurities?
Am i safe in assuming there is no real risk of adverse health effects from impurities in LSD?

I'll give this one to you because it's probably very hard to look up.

Some people have derived diethylamine from pesticides (DEET). But the amount of actual pesticide in LSD would be unbelievably miniscule, so it's not a concern. However, chemicals similar to LSD, but without the "D" (say, monoethylamide instead of diethylamide, and similar), might possibly, but nobody really knows as far as I can tell, have effects. This is what the good Dr. & I were discussing, actually, specifically the monoethylamide.

The sec-butyl analogue as some of you may recall may or may not have made an appearance along with the pentyl. It's all very shrouded in mystery.
 
Hey dodante, how's it going? It seems a lot of recently absent folks are popping in, it's quite delightful.
 
Nice pics dondante (as always). I went to Yosemite about 10 years ago, when I was much younger. My favorite part that I remember was swimming in a little stream somewhere, the coldest freshest mountain water I've ever swam in. I'd really like to go back sometime soon.


SKL could you send me an invite to your site? It sounds interesting.. I've kind of stopped really reading the forums here much because, not to sound too snobby or anything, but the level of conversation in PD has just steadily degenerated in the few years I've been on BL. Don't know if I'd have much to contribute, but I'd like to check it out.
 
Rog, explain in terms i could understand...
SKL mentioned pesticides or something as impurities in LSD...what chems is he talking about? Wat pesticides.

The DEET molecule has a diethylamide on it, and if you do something called hydrolyzing the amide you can remove the diethylamine part. You need diethylamine to make LSD from lysergic acid.

It's not as scary as it sounds, the impurities aren't an actual pesticide.

edit-- skl beat me to it :)
 
Nice pics dondante (as always). I went to Yosemite about 10 years ago, when I was much younger. My favorite part that I remember was swimming in a little stream somewhere, the coldest freshest mountain water I've ever swam in. I'd really like to go back sometime soon.


SKL could you send me an invite to your site? It sounds interesting.. I've kind of stopped really reading the forums here much because, not to sound too snobby or anything, but the level of conversation in PD has just steadily degenerated in the few years I've been on BL. Don't know if I'd have much to contribute, but I'd like to check it out.

You could always try to raise the bar of discourse and help create more meaningful conversations on here, I don't think any of us would be opposed to it. Of course, going to a board where there is a higher standard, that doesn't cover all the HR and basics we do, would work just well.
 
I would have looked it up SKL but a. i'm too lazy and b. if i did look it up, i wouldn't have understood why use DEET all that well.
The only drogs i know anything about the manufacture of (and i dont know much, i just know a little bit from reading some of the rhodium chem archive and having looked at archives of the hive a few times...) are amphetamines/methamphetamine, and MDxx...
i'm not a chemist, but i've been interested in readin' about drogs and chemistry again recently for some reason...
PD social cannot be controlled nor contained, if you dislike how it is custie then just dont come around...
PD social would be boring if it was just a bunch of people tlaking ONLY ABOUT PSYCHEDELICZ AND THE MEANING OF LIFE and all that...
better to have a motley crue of drog users (who all do use psychedelics of course), gives this place more personality..
its more a social thread now IMO, as in talk about wats goin on in your life and what you're doing IRL and shit than it used to be.
but my memory really isn't that good for this kinda deal.
oi crackas, what happened to nearjat and syd?
 
Last edited:
Regarding the comment about them with BPD, they are still regularly prescribed for it, and mania can be triggered by SSRIs regardless of whether you have BPD or not. I did have a better source but for now Wiki will have to do:
Mania or hypomania is a possible side effect. Users with some type of bipolar disorder are at a much higher risk, however SSRI-induced mania in patients previously diagnosed with unipolar depression can trigger a bipolar diagnosis.

Also, this is why it's not all about "more serotonin":
Mania, the presence of which is a criterion for certain psychiatric diagnoses, is a state of abnormally elevated or irritable mood, arousal, and/ or energy levels.[1] In a sense, it is the opposite of depression
<- The quoted reasons are why some BPD sufferers see their mania as a blessing rather than a curse - and irritable mood and aggression is usually the larger concern, something I have noticed with nearly every SSRI user I've ever come across ;)

As for your point regarding benzos, that is during use, and that is true - however the issue with SSRIs is that most people taking them need to keep increasing their dose every once in a while, until they are no longer effective - when they then attempt to quit, they are left with long-lasting down-regulation and lower levels of serotonin, and while evidence should suggest it's only long-lasting, my personal theory is that it's permanent, as I know people who used SSRIs for 4-5 years, quit for several years - and still can't get full effects from serotonergic drugs, still feel emotionally blunted, and very much regret ever using SSRIs.

My main worry about SSRIs is how many people with moderate/mild depression are prescribed them, while often the patients with major depression are actually given alternative medication, kind of strange given their effects.

An extract from here:
Conclusions The magnitude of benefit of antidepressant medication compared with placebo increases with severity of depression symptoms and may be minimal or nonexistent, on average, in patients with mild or moderate symptoms. For patients with very severe depression, the benefit of medications over placebo is substantial.

Then there are the many side-effects which really don't justify their use in my opinion, many of which can persist even years (or permanently) after ceasing use, e.g. Post-SSRI Sexual Dysfunction

Something like Tianeptine might be a better choice as it enhances reuptake, meaning that upon discontinuation receptors should experience up-regulation, resulting in higher levels of serotonin rather than the down-regulation caused by SSRIs. Along with this, results so far suggest it's more effective for treating major depression and equally effective at treating anxiety - with far fewer side-effects.

Also in my experience even NDRIs like Ritalin promote more positive emotions than SSRIs do. Serotonin doesn't reinforce good feelings, but rather enforces dominant feelings, confidence, and a blunting of strong emotions whether happy or sad. Dopamine on the other hand, as we all know, is very "feelsgoodman" unless you have too much :)

Personally though I don't really think we have any anti-depressants that are very effective right now. The Terence McKenna "heroic dose" of 5 grams of Psilocybin mushrooms in a dark room is probably more effective haha :D

Disclaimer: I'm not a doctor, or a scientist. But from the amount of time I've spent studying SSRIs and similar drugs - and my experiences with SSRI users (and their experiences for that matter) I could never endorse them and I think it's shocking that we prescribe them
 
Last edited:
I didn't get the impression effingcustie was complaining about the social thread, more the discourse of the general PD forum. In that case, I'd agree that the overall quality has gone down but I feel thats natural when there are a lot more people posting now.

The PD social is still the same load of weird people talking bollocks ;)

If my memory serves me correctly, it was actually SKL's idea to create this social thread back when we were the tyrants of PD...Hmm.
 
I didn't get the impression effingcustie was complaining about the social thread, more the discourse of the general PD forum. In that case, I'd agree that the overall quality has gone down but I feel thats natural when there are a lot more people posting now.

That's what I assumed he was talking about, I can see why he says so, it looks more like PD-BDD than PD-ADD sometimes. The social thread is the social thread, we do what we want here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top