"Shed a layer of skin" while peaking on chinese needlepoint lsd?

[Deinonychus]

Okay, but I posted a long-ass explanation on this page of this thread that goes step by step through the possible mechanisms for acid to be 'dirty' and showed how completely infinitesimal the chances are that there's another compound with the ridiculous properties it would have to possess regarding potency and origin within a poorly done synthesis. So if you won't postulate a chemical for that role, and you won't propose a mechanism that doesn't invoke incredibly unlikely chemicals, then your argument comes down to this:

'I'm right because I know I'm right, even though I admit I'm not a scientists and refuse to theorize even as a layman'

As I said in my last post, that just doesn't cut it. I can believe that a kilo of drugs will magically be delivered to my house, but that doesn't mean it will happen! Unsupported conviction doesn't equal truth.

Like we have all said: the mechanism, it is not there.

 

[infantannihilator]

Lets not forget there is really no way to know the purity of your substance unless you have it tested.. now perhaps if you legitimately had proof of the purity percentages and could attribute such effects over a wide range of people in a controlled study then maybe, regardless of the mechanisms, there would be some credence to such claims.

I realize a lot of people like to attribute certain symptoms such as headache, nausea, and GI problems to certain chemicals based on them cropping up after their use, but you cannot wholly correlate effects in this manner. Here is a recent anecdotal experience of my own: 400ug of 25i, 3 hours into the trip I had extreme GI discomfort resulting in diarrhea and about an hour of the trip reeling in extreme discomfort and slight agony from the issue - I had heard others mention GI problems, and my diet is very consistent so it was easy to draw a conclusion that the 25i caused this. My next trip at 800ug I had no such GI issues at all despite similar circumstances, set, setting, food intake, etc. Same batch. I guess I can come to conclude that low doses equate to GI problems whereas high ones don't right?

As much as you want to say "these are definitely not placebo effects," there is no way for you to guarantee this one way or the other. You simply cannot know.

Don't mean to tag team at all here, but Deinonychus is right in that your writing is essentially a grand way of saying "I'm right and I know I'm right because I am right."

 

[Deinonychus]

Except tag-teaming here is nothing less than a defense of the entire purpose for Bluelight to exist!

Point being the placebo claim is invalid in my situation. I understand LSD (and other psychedelics) are very powerful tools which the experience can differ based on setting and other variables. But, that is not the case here. If I eat the same lsd every time (which I pretty much do these days) and my buddy gave me lsd that he told me was <90 % purity but, in reality it was 50% purity, I would be able to call him out on it. We have played games ( "experiments") where we got exchanged lsd (without knowing which batch) and then once high we were able to draw a conclusion of which lsd we took. Keep in mind we have all had much experience with all the supplied batches. But, not one of us has mistaken. We have done this many times.

How would you know to call him out? He could have just given you a blotter than had 50 mics instead of 90 micrograms that were both 99% pure. The amount of acid would be the same as if he gave you two hits of 100 micrograms where one was 90% pure and the other was 50% pure. The rest will be *the other inactive isomers of acid* because even if you somehow synthesize an enantiomerically pure batch of (+)-LSD, exposure to heat and light will degrade some of it to (-)-LSD, both (+)-iso-LSD and (-)-iso-LSD, and lumi-LSD. So the more degradation the lower the purity will go, but the growing fraction that is not active (+)-LSD is now made up of other inactive forms of LSD.

You gotta support your assertions with fact on Bluelight. This site is about disseminating acurate information, not posting our beliefs without associated evidence while passing them off as objective fact. To do so goes against every fiber of what this forum stands for!

 

[Deinonychus]

And everybody always seems to ignore that there are serotonin receptors outside of the brain! the activation of these receptors in other parts of the body can result in vasoconstriction in some places, vasodilation in others. In the tissues making up the GI track they can cause nausea. And most psychedelics, even NBOMes with their absurdly high binding affinity for 5-HT2A, still also has affinity greater than 500 nanomolar at all these other receptors: 5-HT1A, D3, H2, 5-HT1D, α1A adrenergic, δ opioid, serotonin uptake transporter, 5-HT5A, 5-HT1B, D2, 5-HT7, D1, 5-HT3, 5-HT1E, D5, muscarinic M1-M5, H3, and the dopamine uptake transporter.

You can look at that list and say that it's more likely that a chemical is somehow more likely to be 'contaminated' because you felt 'vegetative effects' than it is likely that when all these other receptors, many of which exist in your somatic tissues other than – though also including – the brain, that simultaneous tsunami of receptor activation didn't simply create the body issues itself without invoking incredibly unlikely chemicals being also present? That's absurdity!

 

[Livinginthealps]

Except tag-teaming here is nothing less than a defense of the entire purpose for Bluelight to exist!



How would you know to call him out? He could have just given you a blotter than had 50 mics instead of 90 micrograms that were both 99% pure. The amount of acid would be the same as if he gave you two hits of 100 micrograms where one was 90% pure and the other was 50% pure. The rest will be *the other inactive isomers of acid* because even if you somehow synthesize an enantiomerically pure batch of (+)-LSD, exposure to heat and light will degrade some of it to (-)-LSD, both (+)-iso-LSD and (-)-iso-LSD, and lumi-LSD. So the more degradation the lower the purity will go, but the growing fraction that is not active (+)-LSD is now made up of other inactive forms of LSD.

You gotta support your assertions with fact on Bluelight. This site is about disseminating acurate information, not posting our beliefs without associated evidence while passing them off as objective fact. To do so goes against every fiber of what this forum stands for!

If you read my initial post you would understand that in my experience with LSD the lower the purity the more negative side effects such as headaches, cramps, gastro symptoms, nausea etc. This does not happen with "cleaner" lsd (higher purity). So, when being dosed with 50% lsd, I would be able to distinguish it between the 90 % due to the fact I experience negative body symptoms with lower purity lsd(always). Like I said before we dont mess with it often as no one enjoys it. It is generally half the price per gram. That's a significant difference if you know the going rate of raw.
You can doubt it all you want. I have seen this argument take place here before and i said before I'm not going to argue. I am just saying my opinion based on my vast experience with LSD. You can take it or leave it. Not everyone is a scientist and has the mechanism of action for a particular trait of the drug. I am not making this up as this is also a wide known fact in most circles. People have understood this since labs starting popping up. I guess everyones fooled.

And lol at I must have scientific evidence to have an opinion on bluelight.Not everything in this world is easily explainable.. This isn't ADD. If it was I would expect a statement such as mine would be supported by facts.

 

[itsALLfake]

Same batch. I guess I can come to conclude that low doses equate to GI problems whereas high ones don't right?

I get the relativity of that statement, but repeatable instances could better conclude which way it goes. Even still, like you said, there is no way for you to guarantee. Just cause you eat good consistently, doesn't mean you didn't eat something bad or had something like a nutrient that is typically flushed out of a plant that your body doesn't tolerate well or isn't use to, just one possibility.

Okay, but I posted a long-ass explanation on this page of this thread that goes step by step through the possible mechanisms for acid to be 'dirty' and showed how completely infinitesimal the chances are that there's another compound with the ridiculous properties it would have to possess regarding potency and origin within a poorly done synthesis. So if you won't postulate a chemical for that role, and you won't propose a mechanism that doesn't invoke incredibly unlikely chemicals, then your argument comes down to this:

'I'm right because I know I'm right, even though I admit I'm not a scientists and refuse to theorize even as a layman'

As I said in my last post, that just doesn't cut it. I can believe that a kilo of drugs will magically be delivered to my house, but that doesn't mean it will happen! Unsupported conviction doesn't equal truth.

Like we have all said: the mechanism, it is not there.

I would quote your first post, but it is hella long for me to go through and pick out right now. You say the isomers that would be bi-products are inactive. Are you stating that they are non-psychoactive compounds? or are you stating that they have no effect on one's body at all?

Also, I agree with the quantities one might find in L, but you're concluding your theory based on eating one hit. I haven't even shed a particle of thought on considering just eating 10 or 20 hits since I was 16, much less 1.

Regardless, even mathematics are a rather solid theory, but still a theory. We didn't know how the universe held itself together, and then, dark matter was thrown into the mix, now that that has been echoed for decades, there are solid mathematics to back it up. All still theories supporting theories. I'm not saying I don't believe that these could be fact. None the less, I still perceive the possibility that they aren't. We'll answer all these questions completely, right before a solar flare engulfs us.

 

[EarthBounded]

The difference is that cannabis is a mixture of at least 84 active compounds. Therefore it's entirely reasonable to expect variations in drug effect between different cultivars.

LSD is one single compound - LSD. 100μg of 98% pure LSD and 200μg of 49% pure LSD will have exactly the same pharmacological effect. This is because whatever makes up the remainder of the mixture (d-iso-LSD, lumi-LSD, unreacted ergolines) are entirely inactive at microgram doses).

The fact that the OP is more concerned about the apparent purity of his LSD than the dose he took demonstrates a general level of ignorance about drug use that leads to numerous hospitalisations every year.

Needlepoint is 100% most definitely a type of crystal, it is refined fluff crystal (95% purity) and is claimed to be 100% purity.

 

[psy997]

If you read my initial post you would understand that in my experience with LSD the lower the purity the more negative side effects such as headaches, cramps, gastro symptoms, nausea etc. This does not happen with "cleaner" lsd (higher purity). So, when being dosed with 50% lsd, I would be able to distinguish it between the 90 % due to the fact I experience negative body symptoms with lower purity lsd(always). Like I said before we dont mess with it often as no one enjoys it. It is generally half the price per gram. That's a significant difference if you know the going rate of raw.
You can doubt it all you want. I have seen this argument take place here before and i said before I'm not going to argue. I am just saying my opinion based on my vast experience with LSD. You can take it or leave it. Not everyone is a scientist and has the mechanism of action for a particular trait of the drug. I am not making this up as this is also a wide known fact in most circles. People have understood this since labs starting popping up. I guess everyones fooled.

And lol at I must have scientific evidence to have an opinion on bluelight.Not everything in this world is easily explainable.. This isn't ADD. If it was I would expect a statement such as mine would be supported by facts.

But your post yet again falters against Deinonychus' logic..... As he mentioned earlier, LSD has the potential to cause a waterfall of effects, on the body and mind. If you buy 50% pure LSD, and know it as such, of course you are going to have a higher percentage of trips with discomfort, seeing as you have a predisposed belief that it will cause such. Even if you don't have the belief that it matters, the simple fact of knowing it's of lower purity could bring about negative thoughts, thus causing a bodily reaction.

The body is connected to the mind, folks, much more than modern beliefs give credit to.

 

[Anon0631]

Also, I agree with the quantities one might find in L, but you're concluding your theory based on eating one hit. I haven't even shed a particle of thought on considering just eating 10 or 20 hits since I was 16, much less 1.

A 'hit' isn't a unit of measurement. It's just as likely that you are receiving 10-20μg units as that you are dosing at heroic levels. Unless you can talk micrograms with some degree of certainty, there isn't any validity to your argument.

By the way, just a heads-up: you don't understand the meaning of the word 'theory'.

Needlepoint is 100% most definitely a type of crystal, it is refined fluff crystal (95% purity) and is claimed to be 100% purity.

Can you reference sources or is that just hearsay and drug dealer mythology which you are passing on without questioning?

 

[Deinonychus]

Oh god. What a mess. Well. Let's go through it all bit by bit shall we?

If you read my initial post you would understand that in my experience with LSD the lower the purity the more negative side effects such as headaches, cramps, gastro symptoms, nausea etc. This does not happen with "cleaner" lsd (higher purity).

No, dude, I understood it just fine. I am thinking mine was the post that was not grasped in its entirety.

How do you – yes you personally – know anything about purity of your acid? This is not a facetious, rhetorical question; were I to go purchase acid right now I would not know its purity either! There are two possible ways you could talk about purity while attempting to possess credibility: either somebody told you, or you measured it yourself. I don't need to explain how ridiculous the second possibility is, because people don't have their own personal GC/MS spectrometers in their apartments.

That leaves the first. How would they know? Did *they* conduct an experiment to measure purity by spectroscopic methods? I doubt it. So they probably don't have accurate figures. This lack of information is compounded by the fact that vendors of any stripe talk up their product, whether that is a hamburger, a 747 wide-body jet, or LSD. But even if people didn't lie, you are doubtlessly several middlemen removed from the source of the acid. That person who did the synth would potentially be the only person that could authoritatively speak to purity, because out of everybody in the chain of middlemen on down to yourself they are the most likely to have access to a GC/MS getup, being a master chemist. But even then they would be more likely to forego any analysis in favor of just moving the shit ASAP in case of LEO sniffing around.

Perhaps there is actually a series of honest intermediaries between that guy and you, but even in that incredibly unlikely scenario, I would wager the synthesist said something about *yield*, like 'Yeah, only a 50% yield this time.', and an intermediary confused that with purity.

So, when being dosed with 50% lsd, I would be able to distinguish it between the 90 % due to the fact I experience negative body symptoms with lower purity lsd(always). Like I said before we dont mess with it often as no one enjoys it. It is generally half the price per gram. That's a significant difference if you know the going rate of raw.

Okay, so you are implying here that you're tight with 'The Dude', or if you're not tight with 'The Dude' at least you're tight with the dude who's tight with 'The Dude'. I am making this deduction because you're going on about raw. So even if there's not a single middleman, you're telling me that The Dude, capital letters, ran a GC/MS assay after he did the synthesis, right? Because somewhere in all of this there has to be objective data for you to be able to rattle on about this percent or that percent purity. If there is no test, there are no purity figures. This is not me being a dick, this is science. Either the data is there or it isn't. Which is it?

Because you're saying that your body is a gen-yoo-whine purity-ometer. Okay, I'll pretend for the sake of this next argument that I concede the point that the mushy, messy, variable, damn near infinitely complex set of multilayered systems that is the human body can somehow determine not only pure versus incredibly impure but an actual numerical value (this despite the fact that studies show you can trick a human into tasting a flavor of fruit-spread that they dislike as their favorite flavor merely by labeling it as such in blind tastings). So your superduper human body as purityometer will be like any other scientific instrument of great precision: it will need to be calibrated before it is used, and probably recalibrated at intervals of time throughout its useful lifespan.

So, how did you calibrate your human body as purityometer, pray tell?

You see the problem here. Or then again, you probably don't, but other people will. You need to be calibrated, since you're a scientific instrument, before you are used. This requires a reference sample. What was the reference sample? There was no reference sample, you say? That's what I thought.

Somewhere along the chain of events, there MUST be an objective determination of purity, such as by GC/MS. There is no other way that purity figures can be given in good faith – except in the case that you honestly fail to understand one or more concepts being discussed here – in order for your body, or anything else for that matter – and preferably something a little less ridiculous – to be used for assessing numerical values of purity.

Hah, yeah, that reminds me, the human body is pretty much the antithesis of a scientifically repeatable measurement instrument. I don't even know where to start with this. How do you control for the variables, dude? That is to say how do you ensure that the dirty acid makes you bloated, instead of it being gas from food you ate? I mean, you're trying to tell me with a straight face that you measure the purity of your acid in a supposedly authoritative fashion by subjective feelings about how intense your GI distress is?

No! I will not have it! That is so far past the border of ridiculous-land that even I – being very, very much given to arguing points that I believe in using techniques of rational debate – will touch no further. I've never flat out disregarded somebody's fallacious statement on this forum before, and I am going to keep on keeping on without trying to be mean (Am I guys? Be honest. I hope not, debate is great, being mean just sucks..), but that is literally not even worth my time and effort.

You can doubt it all you want.

I'm so glad I have your permission!

I have seen this argument take place here before and i said before I'm not going to argue. I am just saying my opinion based on my vast experience with LSD. You can take it or leave it. Not everyone is a scientist and has the mechanism of action for a particular trait of the drug. I am not making this up as this is also a wide known fact in most circles. People have understood this since labs starting popping up. I guess everyones fooled.

Logical fallacies? Oh, yes! Let me count the ways: Appeal to authority (I've done SO MUCH ACID DEWD!), ad populum (EVERYBODY knows this to be true), appeal to poverty (I'm not a scientist therefor I can make scientific claims anyway!), circular reasoning (I am saying dirty acid exists, dirty acid exists because I say so), burden of proof (I don't need to argue my extraordinary claims), argument from repetition (stating that you're right four different ways), argument from ignorance (I say it's true because you can't prove it's false), and finally begging the question (I don't need to bother to finish my argument, I've seen this debate before, so take it or leave it).

That's like more logical fallacies than SENTENCES! Hah that's AWESOME, makes me smile! Not out of spite either, it's actually just cool for being that weird! I recognize that I suck at logical debate in its most traditional form, and so I will add the caveat that some of those assertions of logical fallacy are less concrete than others, like circular reasoning. It may not totally satisfy the strict definition. This paragraph is awfully circular to me though, like 'everybody knows I'm right, I'm right because it's a widely held belief', which is predicated on everybody knowing it.

And lol at I must have scientific evidence to have an opinion on bluelight.Not everything in this world is easily explainable.. This isn't ADD. If it was I would expect a statement such as mine would be supported by facts.

Dude, no. If this were ADD you'd be waking up in a sewer in Calcutta wondering where your spleen is and why there's beurre blanc smeared on your strangely-aching hindquarters in the manner of lube! They would tear you to bloody pieces of gristle, man, you have to understand *I* don't even post in ADD, because newcomers get eaten whole regardless of their merit, and newcomers trying to use the level of their flatulence as a method for assessing the purity of their drugs get the aforementioned penetration and organ-theft while blacked out on force-fed tert-butyl alcohol or chloral hydrate, to wake up in the slums' collective outhouse if they're lucky, assuming they lived that long!

You're taking what I said to an absurd extreme. I didn't say that you needed to run a goddamned placebo-controlled, double-blind research program, now did I? I said that you need to back up your arguments with evidence. I allow for well-constructed conjecture; lord knows, probably 99% of everything I post is in one way or another partly conjecture, hopefully well-constructed.

But saying that your body measures the purity of LSD at a precise, numerical level is akin to my saying I really do have two dicks: it's an extremely provocative claim. My response to you was akin to the 'pics or it didn't happen!' that would immediately follow my claim to be doubly-endowed. And replying that your sensitive measurement instrument within your body is actually just your subjective interpretation of your stomach ache and farts, and worse yet blatantly disregarding even the trappings of attempting to control for variables, is not the answer that solidifies your credibility, or backs up your argument. Please, try to see what I'm saying? Just even a little bit? I wouldn't have bothered to write this out if I was just being snarky; I thought the last post would show you where I'm coming from but that attempt failed epically and utterly, so now I try again.

Finally, look at this post quoted below. This is how you argue a point *as conjecture* in a *well-informed* way. It is devoid of nonsense and is thoughtfully constructed.

I would quote your first post, but it is hella long for me to go through and pick out right now. You say the isomers that would be bi-products are inactive. Are you stating that they are non-psychoactive compounds? or are you stating that they have no effect on one's body at all?

I am indeed saying they are inactive, but luckily this one isn't my opinion, it's been proven by somebody somewhere. I'm still trying to dig something better than wikipedia up on the subject, but I wrote something up in the FAQ proposal thread explaining why drugs' isomers do different things and why it is possible for acid's three isomers to be totally inactive, as opposed to say amphetamine where both isomers are active but one is better than the other.

Also, I agree with the quantities one might find in L, but you're concluding your theory based on eating one hit. I haven't even shed a particle of thought on considering just eating 10 or 20 hits since I was 16, much less 1.

Holy Jesus wow! That's a LOT of acid! I admit I have pushed the envelope with mushrooms in exactly such a fashion but I haven't done so with acid. I've gotten lucky in that mostly a hit will be like +3 on the Shulgin scale, but then there are the other hundreds of times where it was total bunk or DOX some such. Chicago seems to have amazing acid, but is simultaneously flooded with the worst bunk garbage worthless shit-crap masquerading as acid, so that you either trip sacks off of a hit or get nowhere (or get DOXed, or these days probably NBOMed). I think taking a super high dose of acid will need to be put on the agenda!

I'm assuming your hits aren't weak near-bunk. We may disagree about the chances of dirty acid being real but I can respect you anyway because your posts are nicely sensible and besides, why should you not respect somebody over a single point of disagreement? Anyway point being your post get my respect so I assume you know what good acid is and just like to take tons of it. I've certainly met that sort of psychonaut before, it's more common that I would have thought (or rather people who do that but haven't lost their shit are more common than I thought). Then again I a-have been accused of pushing them drugs waaay too hard before, so who knows, maybe I'm in the category too and just think my use is normal? 8)

Regardless, even mathematics are a rather solid theory, but still a theory. We didn't know how the universe held itself together, and then, dark matter was thrown into the mix, now that that has been echoed for decades, there are solid mathematics to back it up. All still theories supporting theories. I'm not saying I don't believe that these could be fact. None the less, I still perceive the possibility that they aren't. We'll answer all these questions completely, right before a solar flare engulfs us.

Right, like I said, sensible respect-worthy posts.

I myself wonder about dark matter and dark energy. The evidence for dark matter is seriously strong, but yet our WIMP detectors have conflicting evidence. Some see data, and seasonally-variable data, others see a big fat nothing. Seasonal variation is curious and possibly important, because as we orbit the sun sometimes our relative vector points in the same direction that the sun orbits the galaxy, while the opposite side of the ellipse has our vector of movement pointing away from the direction that the sun orbits the galaxy. That means that for half the year we are going ever so slightly faster in the direction the sun orbits the galaxy (the velocity of our solar system traveling around the galaxy plus our relatively small extra velocity since the earth is going the same overall direction as it orbits the sun) and half the year our overall velocity in the direction the sun orbits is less than than that of the sun itself (we're then in the opposite side of the orbit, so our vector is opposite that of the sun, subtracting our velocity from its velocity as far as how far our planet is going in the spinward direction).

So as we ever so slightly speed up and slow down relative to the velocity of the sun, Earth is plowing through the cloud of dark matter that fills our galaxy (and greatly exceeds it in size), so if WIMPs are indeed *weakly* interacting massive particles, we would be seeing more of those occasional collisions between a WIMP and an atom of normal matter half the time and seeing less the other half of the time. One of the Italian detectors, DAMA I believe, sees this pattern, but nobody else does.

But that's all assuming the shit is in fact real. Until we get hard data the scientific thing is actually to hold some healthy doubts about it, understanding that the emphasis is on healthy. So no unreasonable, ridiculous certain denials, just an acknowledgment that we don't know everything and nature has continued to surprise us throughout all of human history.

I'm more perplexed by dark energy though since we're basically clueless. Is it a form of energy? Is it a scalar field? Maybe an all-pervasive field like the Higgs field? But then we should be able to pinch off bits of it as exotic particles if the energies are right, as with the Higgs boson. It's so funny that Einstein's 'fudge factor variable', the cosmological constant, has returned to haunt cosmology so!

Yet another total unknown is the predominance of normal matter over antimatter. This requires symmetry breaking, and the implications are deep.

And that's not even getting into the blundering about in search of a grand unified theory uniting general and special relativity and quantum physics. Wouldn't it be funny if the universe really did just have a dual nature, with quantum physics and relativity being equally valid, as a photon is a wave and a particle all at once (well, depends on what you measure, but until you measure it's both). It's true that there are certain things where quantum physics and relativity give mutually impossible conclusions, singularities are one such concept, so thus the search for a way to modify or somehow unite them to form the aforementioned grand unified dealie. I just like thinking of the headaches the universe could give our cosmologists and physicists if it turned out they are mutually incompatible and *both right*, like the particle that is a wave, but they couldn't be unified, in the way that a particle can't be both at once when you measure it.

Needlepoint is 100% most definitely a type of crystal, it is refined fluff crystal (95% purity) and is claimed to be 100% purity.

Look, I've exhausted my capacity for typing on an iPhone. So I won't go into how wrong this is, in the sense of just being misinformation. But hey, if you really want to go there, tell me I'm wrong and I can get around to it next post, hey? For reals, for fun, and education, not to be a dick. I just can't go there this very instant till my thumbs are reincarnated!

 

[sekio]

I am indeed saying they are inactive, but luckily this one isn't my opinion, it's been proven by somebody somewhere.

not only has it been proven with binding data (e.g nichols papers), one mr. hoffmann has synthesized all the isomers (LSD and iso-LSD) and decided only LSD has significant central activity.

by the way, you're welcome to post in add any time.

 

[kidklmx]

Yeah but couldn't that mean that the isomers just don't cross the BBB (central activity means action in the CNS, right?) and thus bind the serotonin receptors that are in the body causing the side-effects? Or don't they bind the serotonin receptors meaningfully?

 

[Anon0631]

There's no reason why (someone correct me if I'm wrong) different isomers should be more or less lyophilic. There's plenty if reason why they would display different receptor binding affinities.

IE. they all make it to the brain but only one of the four isomers displays activity.

Mods, can we maybe merge this thread with the dirty acid FAQ thread and big&dandify it?

 

[Livinginthealps]

Oh god. What a mess. Well. Let's go through it all bit by bit shall we?



No, dude, I understood it just fine. I am thinking mine was the post that was not grasped in its entirety.

How do you – yes you personally – know anything about purity of your acid? This is not a facetious, rhetorical question; were I to go purchase acid right now I would not know its purity either! There are two possible ways you could talk about purity while attempting to possess credibility: either somebody told you, or you measured it yourself. I don't need to explain how ridiculous the second possibility is, because people don't have their own personal GC/MS spectrometers in their apartments.

That leaves the first. How would they know? Did *they* conduct an experiment to measure purity by spectroscopic methods? I doubt it. So they probably don't have accurate figures. This lack of information is compounded by the fact that vendors of any stripe talk up their product, whether that is a hamburger, a 747 wide-body jet, or LSD. But even if people didn't lie, you are doubtlessly several middlemen removed from the source of the acid. That person who did the synth would potentially be the only person that could authoritatively speak to purity, because out of everybody in the chain of middlemen on down to yourself they are the most likely to have access to a GC/MS getup, being a master chemist. But even then they would be more likely to forego any analysis in favor of just moving the shit ASAP in case of LEO sniffing around.

Perhaps there is actually a series of honest intermediaries between that guy and you, but even in that incredibly unlikely scenario, I would wager the synthesist said something about *yield*, like 'Yeah, only a 50% yield this time.', and an intermediary confused that with purity.



Okay, so you are implying here that you're tight with 'The Dude', or if you're not tight with 'The Dude' at least you're tight with the dude who's tight with 'The Dude'. I am making this deduction because you're going on about raw. So even if there's not a single middleman, you're telling me that The Dude, capital letters, ran a GC/MS assay after he did the synthesis, right? Because somewhere in all of this there has to be objective data for you to be able to rattle on about this percent or that percent purity. If there is no test, there are no purity figures. This is not me being a dick, this is science. Either the data is there or it isn't. Which is it?

Because you're saying that your body is a gen-yoo-whine purity-ometer. Okay, I'll pretend for the sake of this next argument that I concede the point that the mushy, messy, variable, damn near infinitely complex set of multilayered systems that is the human body can somehow determine not only pure versus incredibly impure but an actual numerical value (this despite the fact that studies show you can trick a human into tasting a flavor of fruit-spread that they dislike as their favorite flavor merely by labeling it as such in blind tastings). So your superduper human body as purityometer will be like any other scientific instrument of great precision: it will need to be calibrated before it is used, and probably recalibrated at intervals of time throughout its useful lifespan.

So, how did you calibrate your human body as purityometer, pray tell?

You see the problem here. Or then again, you probably don't, but other people will. You need to be calibrated, since you're a scientific instrument, before you are used. This requires a reference sample. What was the reference sample? There was no reference sample, you say? That's what I thought.

Somewhere along the chain of events, there MUST be an objective determination of purity, such as by GC/MS. There is no other way that purity figures can be given in good faith – except in the case that you honestly fail to understand one or more concepts being discussed here – in order for your body, or anything else for that matter – and preferably something a little less ridiculous – to be used for assessing numerical values of purity.

Hah, yeah, that reminds me, the human body is pretty much the antithesis of a scientifically repeatable measurement instrument. I don't even know where to start with this. How do you control for the variables, dude? That is to say how do you ensure that the dirty acid makes you bloated, instead of it being gas from food you ate? I mean, you're trying to tell me with a straight face that you measure the purity of your acid in a supposedly authoritative fashion by subjective feelings about how intense your GI distress is?

No! I will not have it! That is so far past the border of ridiculous-land that even I – being very, very much given to arguing points that I believe in using techniques of rational debate – will touch no further. I've never flat out disregarded somebody's fallacious statement on this forum before, and I am going to keep on keeping on without trying to be mean (Am I guys? Be honest. I hope not, debate is great, being mean just sucks..), but that is literally not even worth my time and effort.



I'm so glad I have your permission!



Logical fallacies? Oh, yes! Let me count the ways: Appeal to authority (I've done SO MUCH ACID DEWD!), ad populum (EVERYBODY knows this to be true), appeal to poverty (I'm not a scientist therefor I can make scientific claims anyway!), circular reasoning (I am saying dirty acid exists, dirty acid exists because I say so), burden of proof (I don't need to argue my extraordinary claims), argument from repetition (stating that you're right four different ways), argument from ignorance (I say it's true because you can't prove it's false), and finally begging the question (I don't need to bother to finish my argument, I've seen this debate before, so take it or leave it).

That's like more logical fallacies than SENTENCES! Hah that's AWESOME, makes me smile! Not out of spite either, it's actually just cool for being that weird! I recognize that I suck at logical debate in its most traditional form, and so I will add the caveat that some of those assertions of logical fallacy are less concrete than others, like circular reasoning. It may not totally satisfy the strict definition. This paragraph is awfully circular to me though, like 'everybody knows I'm right, I'm right because it's a widely held belief', which is predicated on everybody knowing it.



Dude, no. If this were ADD you'd be waking up in a sewer in Calcutta wondering where your spleen is and why there's beurre blanc smeared on your strangely-aching hindquarters in the manner of lube! They would tear you to bloody pieces of gristle, man, you have to understand *I* don't even post in ADD, because newcomers get eaten whole regardless of their merit, and newcomers trying to use the level of their flatulence as a method for assessing the purity of their drugs get the aforementioned penetration and organ-theft while blacked out on force-fed tert-butyl alcohol or chloral hydrate, to wake up in the slums' collective outhouse if they're lucky, assuming they lived that long!

You're taking what I said to an absurd extreme. I didn't say that you needed to run a goddamned placebo-controlled, double-blind research program, now did I? I said that you need to back up your arguments with evidence. I allow for well-constructed conjecture; lord knows, probably 99% of everything I post is in one way or another partly conjecture, hopefully well-constructed.

But saying that your body measures the purity of LSD at a precise, numerical level is akin to my saying I really do have two dicks: it's an extremely provocative claim. My response to you was akin to the 'pics or it didn't happen!' that would immediately follow my claim to be doubly-endowed. And replying that your sensitive measurement instrument within your body is actually just your subjective interpretation of your stomach ache and farts, and worse yet blatantly disregarding even the trappings of attempting to control for variables, is not the answer that solidifies your credibility, or backs up your argument. Please, try to see what I'm saying? Just even a little bit? I wouldn't have bothered to write this out if I was just being snarky; I thought the last post would show you where I'm coming from but that attempt failed epically and utterly, so now I try again.

Finally, look at this post quoted below. This is how you argue a point *as conjecture* in a *well-informed* way. It is devoid of nonsense and is thoughtfully constructed.



I am indeed saying they are inactive, but luckily this one isn't my opinion, it's been proven by somebody somewhere. I'm still trying to dig something better than wikipedia up on the subject, but I wrote something up in the FAQ proposal thread explaining why drugs' isomers do different things and why it is possible for acid's three isomers to be totally inactive, as opposed to say amphetamine where both isomers are active but one is better than the other.



Holy Jesus wow! That's a LOT of acid! I admit I have pushed the envelope with mushrooms in exactly such a fashion but I haven't done so with acid. I've gotten lucky in that mostly a hit will be like +3 on the Shulgin scale, but then there are the other hundreds of times where it was total bunk or DOX some such. Chicago seems to have amazing acid, but is simultaneously flooded with the worst bunk garbage worthless shit-crap masquerading as acid, so that you either trip sacks off of a hit or get nowhere (or get DOXed, or these days probably NBOMed). I think taking a super high dose of acid will need to be put on the agenda!

I'm assuming your hits aren't weak near-bunk. We may disagree about the chances of dirty acid being real but I can respect you anyway because your posts are nicely sensible and besides, why should you not respect somebody over a single point of disagreement? Anyway point being your post get my respect so I assume you know what good acid is and just like to take tons of it. I've certainly met that sort of psychonaut before, it's more common that I would have thought (or rather people who do that but haven't lost their shit are more common than I thought). Then again I a-have been accused of pushing them drugs waaay too hard before, so who knows, maybe I'm in the category too and just think my use is normal? 8)



Right, like I said, sensible respect-worthy posts.

I myself wonder about dark matter and dark energy. The evidence for dark matter is seriously strong, but yet our WIMP detectors have conflicting evidence. Some see data, and seasonally-variable data, others see a big fat nothing. Seasonal variation is curious and possibly important, because as we orbit the sun sometimes our relative vector points in the same direction that the sun orbits the galaxy, while the opposite side of the ellipse has our vector of movement pointing away from the direction that the sun orbits the galaxy. That means that for half the year we are going ever so slightly faster in the direction the sun orbits the galaxy (the velocity of our solar system traveling around the galaxy plus our relatively small extra velocity since the earth is going the same overall direction as it orbits the sun) and half the year our overall velocity in the direction the sun orbits is less than than that of the sun itself (we're then in the opposite side of the orbit, so our vector is opposite that of the sun, subtracting our velocity from its velocity as far as how far our planet is going in the spinward direction).

So as we ever so slightly speed up and slow down relative to the velocity of the sun, Earth is plowing through the cloud of dark matter that fills our galaxy (and greatly exceeds it in size), so if WIMPs are indeed *weakly* interacting massive particles, we would be seeing more of those occasional collisions between a WIMP and an atom of normal matter half the time and seeing less the other half of the time. One of the Italian detectors, DAMA I believe, sees this pattern, but nobody else does.

But that's all assuming the shit is in fact real. Until we get hard data the scientific thing is actually to hold some healthy doubts about it, understanding that the emphasis is on healthy. So no unreasonable, ridiculous certain denials, just an acknowledgment that we don't know everything and nature has continued to surprise us throughout all of human history.

I'm more perplexed by dark energy though since we're basically clueless. Is it a form of energy? Is it a scalar field? Maybe an all-pervasive field like the Higgs field? But then we should be able to pinch off bits of it as exotic particles if the energies are right, as with the Higgs boson. It's so funny that Einstein's 'fudge factor variable', the cosmological constant, has returned to haunt cosmology so!

Yet another total unknown is the predominance of normal matter over antimatter. This requires symmetry breaking, and the implications are deep.

And that's not even getting into the blundering about in search of a grand unified theory uniting general and special relativity and quantum physics. Wouldn't it be funny if the universe really did just have a dual nature, with quantum physics and relativity being equally valid, as a photon is a wave and a particle all at once (well, depends on what you measure, but until you measure it's both). It's true that there are certain things where quantum physics and relativity give mutually impossible conclusions, singularities are one such concept, so thus the search for a way to modify or somehow unite them to form the aforementioned grand unified dealie. I just like thinking of the headaches the universe could give our cosmologists and physicists if it turned out they are mutually incompatible and *both right*, like the particle that is a wave, but they couldn't be unified, in the way that a particle can't be both at once when you measure it.



Look, I've exhausted my capacity for typing on an iPhone. So I won't go into how wrong this is, in the sense of just being misinformation. But hey, if you really want to go there, tell me I'm wrong and I can get around to it next post, hey? For reals, for fun, and education, not to be a dick. I just can't go there this very instant till my thumbs are reincarnated!

Just so you know I am not disagreeing with you for the sake of disagreeing. I am pretty open minded and enjoyed your post on the otopic in the other thread. But, when you experience something many times, it's hard to change the opinion that has been formed from those experiences. Especially, based on some scientific explanation over the internet when there is much more to LSD than what we understand due to its illegality. Don't take that as me being ignorant. If you ate "bad" quality LSD you would not argue. Can I ask how many times you have ingested LSD?


I just had my entire response deleted so I will present a question since I am curious..... If something is not active or low binding affinity ( in this case the isomers/byproducts of LSD synthesis) does that mean they absolutely cannot in anyway shape or form, contribute to the physical experience of the trip in one way or another. Especially, side effects such as stomach cramping, nausea etc. For example, if I took some LSD and a normally non active dose of another substance is it possible that my trip would be different than LSD alone due to synergy of the two drugs. Of course, LSD (psychedelics) trips are all going to be different in the general sense due to setting and other factors. My trips are all very similar for the most part when on the same batch of LSD.
I am pretty sensitive to most drugs. I sometimes take low doses (inactive alone) of other substances such as, ketamine, mushrooms, mdma,etc while on LSD and in my experience I have definitely noticed different effects present although generally, subtle. But obviously, these substances are definitely active and have no problem binding to receptors, so it may be a bad example.

Just to throw it out there. You keep saying there is no such thing as needlepoint and it is just a term used by dealers. I guess you can say, its a term used by "dealers" to describe their crystal as being high purity. But, it is a description of the crystaline structure which is needle like. YES, if your going to pick up some paper and the dealer says "hey this is some amazing point" I would take it with a grain of salt. Just want to clarify that when picking up raw point is a reference to an actual type of crystal.
ALL batches of needlepoint I have picked up has looked like crushed needles? Some vials much more intact than others. Out of curiosity, have you seen lsd in crystal form?



I don't appreciate your attempt at making fun of my posts. You can "doubt" my connections all you want. These things have a funny way of happening and at the time I didn't have much choice in the matter. You are right about me not having a GC/MS in my "apartment" (I live where there are zero traffic lights, there are no apartments here). But, I will say I DO have access to GC/MS. Ofcourse, it is not mine but, rather someone who does chemistry for a living. (No I am not saying every batch gets tested.... well it might but not in my presence) That's enough on source talk. I'm not deeply involved in any illegal aspects of the drug anymore.

I curious and want to know, if there is no difference in LSD even when comparing a 99.9% pure to a 42% pure batch how can I (and others mentioned earlier) differentiate between batches we have all had vast experience with? Are you saying its a lucky guess?


Interesting excerpt from an interview of "Bear" (owsley stanley) doesn't have any concrete information but, it does spark a few thoughts on this topic.

"

B: So the earliest acid you got was mixed — some of it was good and some of it wasn’t good?

O: Most of it was terrible. It would make you high, but it was so full of impurities and other things that it was a totally rough trip.

B: Where do you think the impurities come from?

O: I’m not God. I can’t look into a brownish liquid and tell you what’s in there. There’re all kinds of derivatives of ergot containing various derivatives of lysergic acid that are active in some way in the body. St. Anthony’s fire, do you know about that? It was the result of ergotamine in the ergot growing on rye which was made into bread in the Middle Ages, made your fingers and toes drop off. They are very complex, many of the derivatives, and most of them are active — and when you are doing a synthesis you get all kinds of things that hook up to the lysergic acid molecule. Breakdown products, isomerization — who knows what’s in there?

I’ve had this conversation with Sasha many, many times. I’ve said: “Sasha, as you approach higher and higher purity, you get more and more magical.” He said, “Well, you’re ascribing a very high activity to very minute amounts of impurity.” I said, “I don’t know whether that’s true or not, but there’s something going on there.” Then later I got to thinking about this, and realized that perhaps the impurities are like a kind of catalyst. A catalyst can catalyze a reaction at extremely minute quantities, and often these catalysts are not affected by the reaction. Who knows that there isn’t some catalytic/synergistic effect that occurs? Where you have 100 mcg. of LSD and you have nanograms of some strange fellow-traveler impurity that actually catalyzes the effect of the LSD on the nervous system into something else. I’m not going to say that this is what’s happening, or that I necessarily believe this, but I do know that as you purify LSD you very quickly come to a point where it will not dissolve in the solvent from which you have crystallized it. It gets to a point where it’s insoluble in the methanol, and you have to heat this for such a long period of time in fresh methanol that some of it breaks down. And once it has broken down, only then will it dissolve. So there’s a lot of strange stuff going on with this “chemical” that doesn’t necessarily work according to the usual principles of chemistry. There’s no more chemistry to making LSD than there is to baking a bloody cake. You just have to know how to do it. What parts to use, what temperature to set the oven, etc. Most of it is published, and that which isn’t published is available to an investigative mind. The correct and accepted term for those who make the entheogens is “cook.” I like to think of it as a sort of Gourmet Chef, master of Fine Mental Cuisine.

Now, Sasha is a chemist. I’m not a chemist, I never pretended to be a chemist. I’m an artist. There’s no more chemistry to making LSD than there is to making a bloody cake. You just have to know how to do it. What bits to use, what temperature to set the “oven”, etc. Most of it is published, and that which isn’t published is available to an investigative mind. It helps to be smart, if you’re bright and you pick up on things and pay attention, you can pretty soon figure out what was left out of the published account. On the other hand, a chemist is a person who, wanting to make a compound, having an idea of the structure, evolves in his mind a synthetic process to produce it. To verify the structure of a known original compound is the usual reason for development of a synthesis for a naturally occurring or semi-naturally occurring compound. He is synthesizing this compound in order to prove its structure, or to provide a means of manufacturing it other than extracting it from a plant. A chemist is a highly skilled person. I don’t have any of those skills. What I did is like following a recipe."

 

[Anon0631]

Just so you know I am not disagreeing with you for the sake of disagreeing. I am pretty open minded and enjoyed your post on the otopic in the other thread. But, when you experience something many times, it's hard to change the opinion that has been formed from those experiences. Especially, based on some scientific explanation over the internet when there is much more to LSD than what we understand due to its illegality. Don't take that as me being ignorant.

So... Science... What is it? It's it a thing? A belief system? An alternative to other ways of seeing the world? No. It's a process, devised to stop us doing something really good at - deceiving ourselves. It goes like this.

1) I notice a phenomenon
2) Using deductive reasoning, mathematics, etc., I postulate a mechanism to explain the phenomenon. This is my theory.
3) I devise and experiment which will provide results that will either prove or disprove my theory
4) I collect experimental data
5) I open my findings for other people to criticise.
6) People try to disprove my theory.

If step 6 fails my theory is confirmed. The more experimental evidence built up in favour of my theory, the more certainty we have that the theory models actual objective reality.

A great example is the theory of evolution. Every fossil that is dug up continues to prove the predictions made by Darwin and Wallace but more importantly, not a single fossil has ever been unearthed which suggests a different reality to that postulated by the theory. That's why we can say with a great deal of certainty that the theory of evolution by natural selection is true.

The trouble with your assertions is that you stop at step 1. We are all fallable but particularly when on acid. So your the fact that you believe you have noticed a pattern means very little of value.

 

[Livinginthealps]

So... Science... What is it? It's it a thing? A belief system? An alternative to other ways of seeing the world? No. It's a process, devised to stop us doing something really good at - deceiving ourselves. It goes like this.

1) I notice a phenomenon
2) Using deductive reasoning, mathematics, etc., I postulate a mechanism to explain the phenomenon. This is my theory.
3) I devise and experiment which will provide results that will either prove or disprove my theory
4) I collect experimental data
5) I open my findings for other people to criticise.
6) People try to disprove my theory.

If step 6 fails my theory is confirmed. The more experimental evidence built up in favour of my theory, the more certainty we have that the theory models actual objective reality.

A great example is the theory of evolution. Every fossil that is dug up continues to prove the predictions made by Darwin and Wallace but more importantly, not a single fossil has ever been unearthed which suggests a different reality to that postulated by the theory. That's why we can say with a great deal of certainty that the theory of evolution by natural selection is true.

The trouble with your assertions is that you stop at step 1. We are all fallable but particularly when on acid. So your the fact that you believe you have noticed a pattern means very little of value.

I am not a scientist therefore can not present a relevant mechanism. There has not been enough legitimate research done on LSD to be 100% certain there is nothing else contributing to the experience. Much of what we know about LSD is from peoples experiences through the years with LSD. Bear makes a decent point in the relevant part of the Bruce Elsner interview I posted before. That is coming from someone who made and took much more LSD than we will probably eat in a lifetime. Granted he is not a "chemist". But, his experiences definitely are valid, as are mine and everyone else who experienced negative effects with lower purity. There has been lots of mention of it since the pranksters ran the first acid tests. I wonder if they are all mistaken...Most drugs have negative side effects with decreased purity.

Is there a reason you ignored a few questions? I am truly curious to how much experience you have with LSD? That is not to get a rise out of you or how ever you many negatively interpret the question. I'm just curious how your personal experiences play into your theory.

 

[EarthBounded]

Can you reference sources or is that just hearsay and drug dealer mythology which you are passing on without questioning?

Hmm.. You are from the UK and trying to argue USA chemist's and LSD crystal with me!? I have seen needlepoint very rarely for the last 5 years, the only two people to ever have it that I have seen are connected with the fluff family's, One has a PHD in biochemistry and the other graduated from a 5 year neuroscience program. Sorry thats all I have seen personally, there is very limited 'reference' online as you are asking for about LSD crystal types, considering this is one of the most fragile underground subjects. Sorry the fluff family doesn't have a website or I would send you there.

Anyone else have this 100% cellular level feeling of shedding your very being, having it peeled off and feeling completely renewed after the trip? Almost refreshed or reborn yet still your old self just with less baggage? Ego death?

Yes I have had this feelings many times, I relate it to the soul being released from the physical body, I like your post! Too bad this has turned into some debate about needlepoint.

Look, I've exhausted my capacity for typing on an iPhone. So I won't go into how wrong this is, in the sense of just being misinformation. But hey, if you really want to go there, tell me I'm wrong and I can get around to it next post, hey? For reals, for fun, and education, not to be a dick. I just can't go there this very instant till my thumbs are reincarnated!

Huh!? How is your dirty acid FAQ coming along!? Half the stuff I have seen you post about LSD is incorrect and annoying.

I’ve had this conversation with Sasha many, many times. I’ve said: “Sasha, as you approach higher and higher purity, you get more and more magical.” He said, “Well, you’re ascribing a very high activity to very minute amounts of impurity.” I said, “I don’t know whether that’s true or not, but there’s something going on there.” Then later I got to thinking about this, and realized that perhaps the impurities are like a kind of catalyst. A catalyst can catalyze a reaction at extremely minute quantities, and often these catalysts are not affected by the reaction. Who knows that there isn’t some catalytic/synergistic effect that occurs? Where you have 100 mcg. of LSD and you have nanograms of some strange fellow-traveler impurity that actually catalyzes the effect of the LSD on the nervous system into something else. [/B]

This is logical to a degree, probably the best response I have ever heard for the good ol, LSD IS LSD argument. Are you saying you have personally met and talked with the Shulgins? Sorry I am just kind of confused on how you worded it and curious.

 

[itsALLfake]

A 'hit' isn't a unit of measurement. It's just as likely that you are receiving 10-20μg units as that you are dosing at heroic levels. Unless you can talk micrograms with some degree of certainty, there isn't any validity to your argument.

By the way, just a heads-up: you don't understand the meaning of the word 'theory'.

I make a living by selling theories. It's electrical theory. It's proven to be consistent with data, but I still sell the fact that electrical testing works, when it is just a theory.
I doubt it. I don't think I could sell half-standard 10-20ug hits for $15. unless people are just that stupid, not saying they're not. Hoffman's death memorial blotter, really dark colored with him on his chair petting his cat with swiss alps in the window..that was consistent with what mine was, and no one with half a brain selling substances will have something sent to be tested, either by themselves or someone even distantly connected with them...so sorry I don't take random numbers out to make you think I may know the actual level of what I took.

 

[Livinginthealps]

This is logical to a degree, probably the best response I have ever heard for the good ol, LSD IS LSD argument. Are you saying you have personally met and talked with the Shulgins? Sorry I am just kind of confused on how you worded it and curious.

That is an interview with Bear aka Owsely Stanley. That's what i was talking about before when saying even if I take a sub active dose of another drug on LSD I get a change in effects. A synergy between the two substances. Theres a good chance that is happening with "dirty" LSD. Impurities although inactive alone, can still alter the experience when there is d-LSD present. One way or another there is something happening when impurities are present. Just because we don't understand the mechanism due to limited research, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

[EarthBounded]

That is an interview with Bear aka Owsely Stanley. That's what i was talking about before when saying even if I take a sub active dose of another drug on LSD I get a change in effects. A synergy between the two substances. Theres a good chance that is happening with "dirty" LSD. Impurities although inactive alone, can still alter the experience when there is d-LSD present. One way or another there is something happening when impurities are present. Just because we don't understand the mechanism due to limited research, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I'm sayin! I wouldn't relate it to dirty acid however I think it might help explain the different feelings when ingesting blotters laid off of different crystals. Like I said I always see the LSD IS LSD argument and people think there is no difference between silver and fluff... I have had incredibly different experiences within the same mcg range, I like the catalyst theory.

As for black liquid...friends of mine use to saturate clear crystal into alcohol as far as that it could dissolve. It ended up being rather black, and they drove around with it in jager bottles for better concealment, but it is possible to end up with an ending product that is black, although it would seem like precautions or certain steps voided...sounds gross..but I wouldn't know.

This is cool to see, I actually received a Vial a while back that was dark blue / black, it was very very potent, at first I saw it and immediately said no, so my connection decided to try it before releasing it and he called me the next day saying " your gonna want to try this " so I did and it was definitely Fluff and very potent I ended up cleaning him out completely it was so pure, I actually made a thread on here a while back and everyone kept telling me it was food coloring but it obviously wasn't .

The other funny thing is I carry my Psilocybin tinctures around in Jager bottles to disguise them Never heard of anyone else doing this