Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
Interesting. I wonder if the original Sandoz LSD was 100 % pure and free of these contaminants.
-
PD Moderators: Esperighanto | JackARoe |
LSD question that Ive never had to ask.
- Thread starter sin_is_synthetic
- Start date
Deleted member 521610
Greenlighter
DEA were dumb founded how Owsley scully and sands made such pure extact LSD. There doses were always found to be the same no error of margin which is pharma companies dont even have. they took great care in their chemistry
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
Ok. This article from Erowid has answered all my questions and seems to support much of what @TripSitterNZ has been saying but with some technical specifics that make it a bit easier for the skeptic to grasp.
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
This also helpful https://www.scielo.br/pdf/bjps/v46n4/11.pdf
4meSM
Bluelighter
In theory, 50%, 95% and 99.9% pure LSD should be the same at equivalent doses. If there's any difference, it won't be due to the purity of the LSD but to the nature of the impurities. In other words, if LSD is the only active substance in the sample then the purity doesn't matter.
The idea that 25ug of some impurity can completely change its effects is theoretically possible, but it's much more likely to be due to set&setting and autosuggestion (specially when we're talking about psychedelics).
Noone can tell if they have 90%, 95% or 99.9% pure LSD without analysing it, bioassay is not an effective method to measure purity.
So how do you know the difference is due to those 25ug of whatever impurity is present in the sample?
The food we eat, the water we drink and even the air we breathe contains more than 25ug of a bunch of different molecules, how do you know it's not one of them causing the difference in effects?
I think the burden of proof is on you to at least show the nature of the impurity and provide some evidence indicating that such impurity could indeed alter the pharmacological effects of LSD.
No substance can be 100% pure, there are always going to be some impurities present. That being said, with the right equipment it's pretty easy to measure exactly how much LSD is in the sample, as well as every significant contaminant.
The idea that 25ug of some impurity can completely change its effects is theoretically possible, but it's much more likely to be due to set&setting and autosuggestion (specially when we're talking about psychedelics).
Noone can tell if they have 90%, 95% or 99.9% pure LSD without analysing it, bioassay is not an effective method to measure purity.
So how do you know the difference is due to those 25ug of whatever impurity is present in the sample?
The food we eat, the water we drink and even the air we breathe contains more than 25ug of a bunch of different molecules, how do you know it's not one of them causing the difference in effects?
I think the burden of proof is on you to at least show the nature of the impurity and provide some evidence indicating that such impurity could indeed alter the pharmacological effects of LSD.
No substance can be 100% pure, there are always going to be some impurities present. That being said, with the right equipment it's pretty easy to measure exactly how much LSD is in the sample, as well as every significant contaminant.
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
Sorry, here is the aforementioned Erowid article: https://erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_writings1.shtml
Deleted member 521610
Greenlighter
really pure LSD has even extra magic to it. LSD that has been properly made with the intention of spreading light and love is a level beyond other LSD. where without fail some where between the come up and peak you will utterly dissolve into a infinite soup of love for a moment europhia that transcends so many drugs but still not ego death.
The comedown is smoother on needlepoint compared to fluff there is no vasoconstriction like fluff. On fluff my legs hurt by the come down on needlepoint it felt like the hand of god touched my body and healed it just a warm nice glow
The comedown is smoother on needlepoint compared to fluff there is no vasoconstriction like fluff. On fluff my legs hurt by the come down on needlepoint it felt like the hand of god touched my body and healed it just a warm nice glow
Jabberwocky
Frumious Bandersnatch
I can say I have had only blotter acid and over 30 years the experiences ranged from always terrible to mind-glowingly ecstatic. In my 20s a trip would often be nice to begin with but never ever end well - mainly because I would get sketched out and unable to sleep.
My supposition now is that in those days my psychology had too much unresolved trauma to deal with the LSD experience and the blotters themselves were also contaminated with some kind of strychnine or amphetamine like substance. The Erowid literature suggests that 30 years ago this might have been a real possibility. Once or twice I probably got nBome.
In the last 5 years though I have had quite a few trips with multiple blotters advertised at 150ug. I’ve taken up to 4 of these at a time. These trips, always done solo in my room, have been totally wonderful even though I sometimes cancelled them after 8-10 hours with Seroquel because I had real-life stuff to deal with the next day. My supposition here is that both my psychology and the quality of the product has significantly improved.
My supposition now is that in those days my psychology had too much unresolved trauma to deal with the LSD experience and the blotters themselves were also contaminated with some kind of strychnine or amphetamine like substance. The Erowid literature suggests that 30 years ago this might have been a real possibility. Once or twice I probably got nBome.
In the last 5 years though I have had quite a few trips with multiple blotters advertised at 150ug. I’ve taken up to 4 of these at a time. These trips, always done solo in my room, have been totally wonderful even though I sometimes cancelled them after 8-10 hours with Seroquel because I had real-life stuff to deal with the next day. My supposition here is that both my psychology and the quality of the product has significantly improved.
Deleted member 521610
Greenlighter
really impure LSD i once tried a batch of lsd from a dude who acutally made it himself he got ergot and everything but he lacked experince did not purify it so the supposedly 150 ug blotter was mostly iso-lsd the body load was high really cloudy headspace but had a warm glow to it and i had a good trip with some cones of weed. Though i never went and got LSD again from that old dude i respected him acutally going all the way and pulling off the lsd synthesis but he had no chromography.
I just did czech needlepoint 99.5% the other and holy fuck that was super smooth come up really clear headspace and body load intense tripping very clean visuals.
I just did czech needlepoint 99.5% the other and holy fuck that was super smooth come up really clear headspace and body load intense tripping very clean visuals.
emkee_reinvented
Bluelighter
Op the thread got kinda a derailed. But besides the 2 times, 1/4 and 1/2 blotter LSD in my youth. I do feel LSD is chaotic in comparison, but that could have been set and setting.
My experiences are with the analogues. And those all felt different. Even 1P and Cp were not exactly alike. Was it me or the atmosphere, more or less same set and setting?
But if I believe the Sherry Tek on LSD, where you attach a 1-Acetyl on it that makes for a different experience. So the whole prodrug story seems a bit overexerted. Sure some drugs are prodrugs, lot of known once's like Fenethyline or LisdexAmphetamine. But effect wise they could differ slightly. Or have an effect los of the drug they turn into. For psychedelic's this seems even more so. I hate Psylocibin/ Psilocyn and aMT but love 4-Ho-MIPT and tolerated 5-meo-DIPT.
Because my knowledge of Acid is zero, I used the MDMA example. In the 90's you had pills that although the dosage was lower the overal effect was better, consistently. Taking an equivalent dose of a lesser press did not compensate. So ime not MDMA is equal.
My experiences are with the analogues. And those all felt different. Even 1P and Cp were not exactly alike. Was it me or the atmosphere, more or less same set and setting?
But if I believe the Sherry Tek on LSD, where you attach a 1-Acetyl on it that makes for a different experience. So the whole prodrug story seems a bit overexerted. Sure some drugs are prodrugs, lot of known once's like Fenethyline or LisdexAmphetamine. But effect wise they could differ slightly. Or have an effect los of the drug they turn into. For psychedelic's this seems even more so. I hate Psylocibin/ Psilocyn and aMT but love 4-Ho-MIPT and tolerated 5-meo-DIPT.
Because my knowledge of Acid is zero, I used the MDMA example. In the 90's you had pills that although the dosage was lower the overal effect was better, consistently. Taking an equivalent dose of a lesser press did not compensate. So ime not MDMA is equal.
Last edited:
While we take in hell of a lot more than 25ug of random materials from our environment, they don’t come close molecularly to LSD.
Something like ISO-LSD on the other hand at 25ug could very well negate the LSD despite being inactive when taken alone.
We do know many batches contain significant quantities of this impurity. Not saying it effects things but I am personally a believer there is something to the purity of LSD. Whether it’s iso-LSD or some other impurity..
-GC
DrumTripper
Bluelighter
I think that’s where the debate derails every time; it’s not about adulterants’ capability for psychoactivity, but for their peripheral somatic effects like St. Anthony’s Fire syndrome. No one should be calling it clean or dirty, the molecule is static; but the presence of non-psychoactives like iso-lsd and minute traces of chloroform and other reagents can and do bother some bodies. Remember, some folks are allergic to trace amounts of peanut, getting symptoms from ingesting something that merely touched a peanut. So blotters or drops can be pure or dirty, depending on the manufacture process, starting material, and more. But it’s just my opinion from over 30 years of lsd use.
I believe that the main difference in recipes is due to the fact that there were several methods that you can use to obtain the same result kind of like different directions to get to the same place. The problem is that some of these produce isomers which some people left in the mix..
Evolution of Amine Coupling Reagents
The core step in synthesizing LSD is joining d-lysergic acid with diethylamine. As organic chemistry advanced from the 1930s through the 1990s, the chemical reagents used to facilitate this bond changed significantly:
The Azide Method (1938): Albert Hofmann’s original method at Sandoz converted lysergic acid to a hydrazide and then an azide intermediate. It was complex, highly sensitive to environmental conditions, and produced low yields.
The Anhydride Method (1959): William Garbrecht introduced a sulfur trioxide–dimethylformamide (SO3·DMF) complex, which simplified the reaction and substantially improved yields.
Modern Peptide Coupling: Later literature documented routes using reagents like trifluoroacetic anhydride (TFAA), carbonyldiimidazole (CDI), and PyBOP, each adapting techniques borrowed from modern peptide synthesis.
Managing Stereochemistry (Avoiding Inactive Isomers)
LSD contains two chiral centers (at the C-5 and C-8 carbon positions), yielding four possible spatial isomers. Only one—d-LSD (5R, 8R)—is biologically active. During chemical coupling, the C-8 position easily flips (epimerizes) to form inactive d-iso-LSD. Different synthetic pathways were designed specifically to minimize epimerization or to convert inactive d-iso-LSD back into active d-LSD using base catalysis.
Starting Material Diversity (Semi-Synthetic vs. Total Synthesis)
Semi-Synthesis: Most routes rely on natural ergot alkaloids extracted from the Claviceps purpurea fungus (such as ergotamine tartrate) or morning glory seeds (ergine/LSA) as starting materials, which are hydrolyzed down to lysergic acid.
Total Synthesis: In 1954, chemists Robert Burns Woodward and Edmund Kornfeld created a 15-step total synthesis starting from simple precursor molecules without using natural ergot. Because total synthesis is exceptionally complex and low-yielding, semi-synthetic routes remain the standard.
Legal Controls and Underground Adaptation
As governments placed strict legal regulations on primary precursor chemicals like ergotamine and lysergic acid, clandestine chemists adapted their methods to utilize whatever reagents or precursor sources were accessible. Compilations such as Alexander Shulgin's TIHKAL (1997) documented these academic and modified variations, establishing the popular notion of multiple distinct recipes.
My biggest gripe was always people who identified the recipe by whatever was on the blotter paper...for example Woodstock, blue unicorns, Alex Grey's Jesus Christs. I mean it's true that chemists use the same paper sort of as a trademark and chances are you would see the same quality throughout the whole tour. However there were unscrupulous people who would reprint the same blotter paper and use substandard quality LSD or just sell bunk 10 packs on the next tour. If the seller can't tell you what recipe is laid on the paper then chances are you're not getting what you paid for or the person is so far removed from the chemist that they have no idea. Just my 2¢
Evolution of Amine Coupling Reagents
The core step in synthesizing LSD is joining d-lysergic acid with diethylamine. As organic chemistry advanced from the 1930s through the 1990s, the chemical reagents used to facilitate this bond changed significantly:
The Azide Method (1938): Albert Hofmann’s original method at Sandoz converted lysergic acid to a hydrazide and then an azide intermediate. It was complex, highly sensitive to environmental conditions, and produced low yields.
The Anhydride Method (1959): William Garbrecht introduced a sulfur trioxide–dimethylformamide (SO3·DMF) complex, which simplified the reaction and substantially improved yields.
Modern Peptide Coupling: Later literature documented routes using reagents like trifluoroacetic anhydride (TFAA), carbonyldiimidazole (CDI), and PyBOP, each adapting techniques borrowed from modern peptide synthesis.
Managing Stereochemistry (Avoiding Inactive Isomers)
LSD contains two chiral centers (at the C-5 and C-8 carbon positions), yielding four possible spatial isomers. Only one—d-LSD (5R, 8R)—is biologically active. During chemical coupling, the C-8 position easily flips (epimerizes) to form inactive d-iso-LSD. Different synthetic pathways were designed specifically to minimize epimerization or to convert inactive d-iso-LSD back into active d-LSD using base catalysis.
Starting Material Diversity (Semi-Synthetic vs. Total Synthesis)
Semi-Synthesis: Most routes rely on natural ergot alkaloids extracted from the Claviceps purpurea fungus (such as ergotamine tartrate) or morning glory seeds (ergine/LSA) as starting materials, which are hydrolyzed down to lysergic acid.
Total Synthesis: In 1954, chemists Robert Burns Woodward and Edmund Kornfeld created a 15-step total synthesis starting from simple precursor molecules without using natural ergot. Because total synthesis is exceptionally complex and low-yielding, semi-synthetic routes remain the standard.
Legal Controls and Underground Adaptation
As governments placed strict legal regulations on primary precursor chemicals like ergotamine and lysergic acid, clandestine chemists adapted their methods to utilize whatever reagents or precursor sources were accessible. Compilations such as Alexander Shulgin's TIHKAL (1997) documented these academic and modified variations, establishing the popular notion of multiple distinct recipes.
My biggest gripe was always people who identified the recipe by whatever was on the blotter paper...for example Woodstock, blue unicorns, Alex Grey's Jesus Christs. I mean it's true that chemists use the same paper sort of as a trademark and chances are you would see the same quality throughout the whole tour. However there were unscrupulous people who would reprint the same blotter paper and use substandard quality LSD or just sell bunk 10 packs on the next tour. If the seller can't tell you what recipe is laid on the paper then chances are you're not getting what you paid for or the person is so far removed from the chemist that they have no idea. Just my 2¢
Last edited: