I also
believe this, having followed the last few years of discussion on the shroomery threads primarily, the use of puppet accounts is both obvious and perplexing. I would caution against casting such a wide net (i.e. any new account who has only posted here = tregar), as I'm at least one exception on that list. I have my own reason for limited and focused posting in this thread, but it's not because I'm an alt of tregar. I've seen his face, and I've looked in a mirror, and it's not a match (if it were, I assure you I'd attempt to stop the madness
like in this movie).
The way I've looked at this up until now is as follows:
- Tregar is an unreliable source at best, with misinformation that could lead to harm in the worst case
- Tregar has used puppet accounts on multiple forums to artificically support his claims or bury unwanted scrutiny (demonstrated deception)
- Tregar has no clear motivation to lie; I'm doubtful it's been a ruse for book sales, so I'm left to believe it's either for attention, or he truly believes what he's saying
My reasoning for at least attempting to reproduce his procedure was that, despite the obvious misinformation, deception, and nonsense chemistry, he really did perform what he describes. I purchased his book soon after it was released (I do
not recommend spending your money on this, it's basically his rambling megaposts copied into book format, with added pictures). The pictures demonstrate that he actually did this procedure. One comment he makes that the final residue resembles "slimy banana peel" is exactly what I observed, so that was additional confirmation that he at least made it that far. In summary, I wanted to see if there was perhaps a real observation, being buried by poor chemistry and communication skills. There wasn't.
@Didgital you may find this thread (from 2020) an interesting read, if you haven't already.
https://www.bluelight.org/community...52-like-upgraded-version-of-lsd.890589/page-4
Within that thread, you'll find the original quote from vecktor regarding some old TLC results. For comparison, I've added the version that tregar continuously uses in his posts.
Notice the difference? The observations and conclusions of vecktor are completely changed to fit tregar's needs.
The presence of water precludes any change in the alkaloid profile. In the original thread, vecktor exhaustively tries to communicate this to tregar, but it's like watching a chemist talk to a politician, the latter just repeats what he wants to hear. It doesn't help that tergar also constantly edits his posts.
@Allylbenzene I'm honestly surprised Nichols is entertaining this idea, as the structure isn't something I'd expect to be very active based on the extensive work that Nichols and others have done with di- and monosubstituted N-alkylamides. For reference, the structures of lysergic acid (R)-α-hydroxyisovaleramide (left, the hypothetical adduct) and lysergic acid isovaleramide (right) are below.
Personally, I've already moved on to other areas of interest. I'm specifically interested in the conversion of the hemiacetal LSH (from fresh seeds) into a stable acetal. This is real chemistry that can be done in anhydrous methanol with an acid catalyst like PPTS. The structural similarity of this product, lysergic acid α-methoxyethylamide, would be closer to products like
LSB (specifically the R stereoisomer) or
LSP, which meet or exceed the potency of LSD in animal drug discrimination assays. This is not a new idea, and the aforementioned vecktor suggested it briefly in the above thread:
For reference, the structures of lysergic acid (S)-α-methoxyethylamide (assume this stereoisomer would be most active), (R)-2-butylamide (LSB), and 3-pentylamide (LSP):