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

Crowd funded LD50 experiments on legal RCs

perpetualdawn

perpetualdawn

Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
3,165
Location
uʍɐdlɐnʇǝdɹǝp
An idea:

A crowd-funded LD50 experiment (on mice or rats) for some of the legal RCs that we don't have much toxicity data on. I would suggest doing it on 25C-NBOMe first as it seems to be popular, new, of unknown toxicity, and potentially dangerous. I'm wondering if there's enough community interest to support such an experiment. I sort of feel bad suggesting it without being willing to conduct the experiment myself, but hoping this suggestion could spark something.

If someone had the chops to conduct such an experiment, and put together a kickstarter or something for it, I would definitely put some money on it.

Lets put the Research back into Research Chemicals?
 
The thing is that LD50's in mice don't correspond necessarily to humans.
It gives a rough estimate but they need to adjust the numbers for humans due to our specific metabolisms and size etc. but it would still just be an educated guess
 
I agree, LD50s for mice don't necessarily translate well to humans, but they can give good clues and are much more ethical than using people :)
Lol at the study on study of studies. I'll make sure to study that.
 
perpetualdawn said:
An idea:

A crowd-funded LD50 experiment (on mice or rats) for some of the legal RCs that we don't have much toxicity data on. I would suggest doing it on 25C-NBOMe first as it seems to be popular, new, of unknown toxicity, and potentially dangerous. I'm wondering if there's enough community interest to support such an experiment. I sort of feel bad suggesting it without being willing to conduct the experiment myself, but hoping this suggestion could spark something.

If someone had the chops to conduct such an experiment, and put together a kickstarter or something for it, I would definitely put some money on it.

Lets put the Research back into Research Chemicals?
Click to expand...

If by chops you mean the knowledge and technical skill, yes that part is easy. Having access to good quality resources (equipment, chemicals, defined lineage research animals) that is going to cost one hell of a lot of money. I mean a LOT. As an example, an 8 person research group costs ~$300,000 a year to run; and this is with major equipment already purchased and 4 of those 8 people are grad students. Most of the money goes to equipment maintenance, supplies, chemicals and 2 salaries. Good luck getting ethics approval for any experiments.

Extrapolating from animal to human models would be tenuous at best, and you'd have little or no chance at finding a facility willing to host such research.

I've been working with and killing animals for over 24 years :( Dogs, cats, rats, mice and some pregnant sheep are the only ones I care to mention. Quite frankly I think I'm going to hell for some of the things I've done in the name of research.

Human applicable medical research is obscenely expensive.

Tom
 
OP : You are the best indicator, that 25C-NBOMe is garbage if you suggest animal cruelty in a psychedelics forum. That indicates, that it could not delight your psyche in any way. Why isn't this closed already ?
 
Ziirp I really hope that's a joke or you don't deserve any safe hygienic/cosmetic nor ANY medicine.
Testing drugs that humans use on animals isn't animal cruelty.
There's a difference between breaking eggs to make an omelette and egging a strangers house.
 
Abject said:
Ziirp I really hope that's a joke or you don't deserve any safe hygienic/cosmetic nor ANY medicine.
Testing drugs that humans use on animals isn't animal cruelty.
There's a difference between breaking eggs to make an omelette and egging a strangers house.
Click to expand...

Err yes it is !
It's fucking terrible and the animals suffer and feel real pain and fear.

However it is sometimes necessary. There is a difference between testing on animals to find cures for diseases and testing RCs because people are too lazy and stupid to slowly increase their dose.

People reading will already have formed their opinions on this so a debate is pointless

With regards to the OP. If the untested nature of RCs bothers you don't take them. Don't make another living thing suffer so you can get higher.
 
I would never support this kind of research on animals. We choose to experiment on ourselves because the resulting data is more useful than animal data.

I also disapprove of any animal testng for recreational drugs, cosmetics etc & I am only barely able to support such experiments in an effort to cure Cancer or Alzheimers...

I like the idea of legitimising RC research, but lets not poison or injure animals for our own peace of mind...
 
Abject : So you insist I should be thankful, that they adjust the amount of mineral oil in shampoo - so that it causes cancer in ~20 instead of already in ~5 years and noone can suspect it as culprit - by testing it on rodents before. I'm so sad, that I don't deserve those precious liquids. Moreover not every one chooses to ingest the so called "medicine" (drugs, that are tested on animals) as nonreflective as you seem to do.

As some of the less cruel persons in this thread mentioned, this discussion is pointless.
 
Si Ingwe said:
I would never support this kind of research on animals. We choose to experiment on ourselves because the resulting data is more useful than animal data.

I also disapprove of any animal testng for recreational drugs, cosmetics etc & I am only barely able to support such experiments in an effort to cure Cancer or Alzheimers...

I like the idea of legitimising RC research, but lets not poison or injure animals for our own peace of mind...
Click to expand...

what world of rainbow and unicorn scientific research do you freaking live in dude?
 
Folley said:
^ However the alternative would be to find volunteers who want to take lethal amounts of hard drugs... not a very moral situation either way.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of people who do that, they just don't realise they're lethal doses before they take them.
What we need to do is encourage the bold and reckless psychedelic explorers to keep better records where others can easily access them.
 
GreenMachine said:
what world of rainbow and unicorn scientific research do you freaking live in dude?
Click to expand...

Have you ever catheterized a pregnant Ewe? Have you ever liver perfused 6 day old Beagle puppies (in the name of asthma research)? Have you ever amputated all four limbs from mammals in the name of bone density studies? I have, and it is completely fucking disgusting what research is allowed to get away with.

Again, we're talking about crowd funded research for chemicals that a lot of us use for pleasure. You may not find that morally objectionable; I do.

Try walking inside of an animal holding facility where they've got 10 dogs waiting to be experimented on. Most of them are snarly evil fucks. Occasionally the 10th one will wag it's tail at you, and then you feel like committing suicide.

I don't know about you, but I live in a world full of shit humans.

Tom
 
On a more serious note I agree with the objective, establishing genuine scientific data on drugs which have very little real data on them and a lot of real world use.
While any data would relate to mice that's ok as it's better than we have at present and transleateable to standard mg per Kg for humans.

I'd suggest this isn't the place to start it however. It'd be better to approach a lab (or many) with a proposal for certain drugs and the research you want to do on them, get a quote and rough timetable and plan from them as to what needs to be done and then go on kickstarter or indiegogo & raise the funds to make it happen.

Raising it here, and on any other forum is just guaranteed to start a fight between the 'animal cruelty is bad & wrong' folk and those who think it can be justified.
 
I'm not talking about using dogs or monkeys. I'm talking about injecting rats with an NBOMe to find out the LD50 for that mammal. It's definitely a horrible, cruel and nasty thing to do, I recognize that. I'm not convinced that it's ethical either, so I'm glad this has stirred up discussion. But the argument is this:

Human life is intrinsically more precious than that of a rat or mouse, and if sacrificing a few of them will save a human life (or mind), I believe it is worth it and justified. Of course it's also debatable whether this kind of research could actually save a human life. But we're seeing reports of fatalities from these NBOMes, and it seems like a lot of people are using them, so it is my opinion that if we had a bit more information about how dangerous this stuff is to a fellow mammal, it would encourage users to be more careful with their doses. And that could save a life. I would rather a rodent sacrifice than a human sacrifice.

But yeah, its a completely nasty thing to do. I would have a very hard time injecting rodents with a toxic dose of a drug. I've been a vegetarian my whole life and part of the reason for it is that I feel a great deal of empathy for living creatures with brains. I can totally see why you wouldn't want to support something like this. It's definitely debatable if one life has more value than another as well.

I would like to remind those of you with harsh words and extreme views that everything from the upholstery you sat on, to the soda you've sipped, to the LSD you dropped, to the meds your doctor prescribed has been tested on animals for toxicity. If you hold strongly to the view that animal testing is always wrong, then you need to do some deep soul searching about how you live in this world.

Tom, I'm sorry you've had to do that kind of work with animals. That would be so completely crushing, and I'm sure a lot of it was unnecessary. Maybe this study that I'm proposing is unnecessary too, maybe we can find a better way to be safe in the PD community. But it kind of freaks me out to hear about human NBOMe fatalities, and that a dangerous dose might be so close to the recreational one. I think if we had some data on how toxic this stuff is to a rat or mouse, and compared that to the level of toxicity of something like LSD in the same animal model, it might promote a bit more caution for users dosing.

Blue Druid: you're probably right. Most people are happy to eat meat from the grocery store as long as they don't think about how it was killed, pop tylenol without thinking about the animals it was tested on. No need to stir up shit making people face the cruelty of the world.
 
Sorry, the premise sucks. How exactly do you know that a rats life is of less value than your own? I am very, very wary about assuming that somehow my life is more important than that of, say, a rat.

Thomas Davie said:
Again, we're talking about crowd funded research for chemicals that a lot of us use for pleasure. You may not find that morally objectionable; I do.
Click to expand...

As do I! Nicely put! We're talking about deliberately poisoning animals so we can have fun with less risk? Nice.

GreenMachine said:
what world of rainbow and unicorn scientific research do you freaking live in dude?
Click to expand...

Perhaps you meant to phrase that politely, mate?

Editted to say the instead of "your".
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top