• 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 |

Are chemists still researching and synthesizing new psychedelics?

A

arcticfunky

Greenlighter
Joined
Nov 23, 2010
Messages
3
I was just wondering if chemists like Shulgin and others are still working on finding new chemicals? I don't know much about chemistry but i've seen the huge amount of RC's that are out there and was hoping that somewhere someone's working on finding new chemicals to explore our consciousness. =D

Also do you guys think there will ever be a new chemical found, surpassing DMT, LSD, Psilocybin, 2CE, and MDMA in usefulness, depth, safety etc, a Soma type drug?
 
Of course people will always be making new chemicals... as for surpassing DMT and other psychedelics... I guess never say never.
 
I think some of the research has gone clandestine sort of. New compounds also find their way from journal papers by Nichols and the like. Some of them reach the mainstream rc market.
 
I wonder about this as well and I wonder what really differentiates LSD and DMT from research chemicals. What makes LSD and DMT not research chemicals?

-djstrip
 
Mitchi said:
LSD and DMT has been researched. RC's have not
Click to expand...

But, RC's have to be researched to an extent. I mean wouldn't the chemist have to do multiple tests to perfect what he/she is creating? My understanding of RC's is pretty low, sorry for all the questions.

-djstrip
 
djstrip said:
But, RC's have to be researched to an extent. I mean wouldn't the chemist have to do multiple tests to perfect what he/she is creating? My understanding of RC's is pretty low, sorry for all the questions.

-djstrip
Click to expand...

LSD and DMT have been tested extensively in vivo, in the living body, in controlled, open experiments, to the point where many things are known about them such as safety profile etc.

RCs have yet to undergo this process.
 
djstrip said:
But, RC's have to be researched to an extent. I mean wouldn't the chemist have to do multiple tests to perfect what he/she is creating? My understanding of RC's is pretty low, sorry for all the questions.

-djstrip
Click to expand...

Not really, chemistry doesn't work like that. You begin with a starting material and, using specific reagents, manipulate it via reactions that elicit very specific transformations of the starting material's functional groups-- you know exactly what you're making in any given step of the synthesis. The only testing that needs to be done is to prove that you do indeed have the desired final product, which can usually be done with simple thin-layer chromatography.
 
they are not researched for human consumption.
BUT, in the "advanced drug discussion", some BL'ers can actually see if a structure has potential to be dangerous, don't ask me how
 
"they" in ADD sometimes speculate, or depending on the molecule try to draw logical connections to theorize whether or not a molecule is potentially dangerous. Obviously with out studies these theories can not be proven. By having an understanding of the molecular structure, routes of metabolism, related molecules binding assay, or other various assays, pharmacology, the physiology and anatomy (cytology specifically) of the human body, and molecular biology, one can theorize upon the potential dangers of a molecule.
 
At least as far as a soma-type is concerned, Big Pharma is getting closer all the time.
 
knockando said:
LSD and DMT have been tested extensively in vivo, in the living body, in controlled, open experiments, to the point where many things are known about them such as safety profile etc.

RCs have yet to undergo this process.
Click to expand...
K, that clears it up.
Roger&Me said:
Not really, chemistry doesn't work like that. You begin with a starting material and, using specific reagents, manipulate it via reactions that elicit very specific transformations of the starting material's functional groups-- you know exactly what you're making in any given step of the synthesis. The only testing that needs to be done is to prove that you do indeed have the desired final product, which can usually be done with simple thin-layer chromatography.
Click to expand...
Oh okay, cool. So the chemist always knows what they're working with at each stage of the process.
Mitchi said:
they are not researched for human consumption.
BUT, in the "advanced drug discussion", some BL'ers can actually see if a structure has potential to be dangerous, don't ask me how
Click to expand...
kk
Cloudy said:
"they" in ADD sometimes speculate, or depending on the molecule try to draw logical connections to theorize whether or not a molecule is potentially dangerous. Obviously with out studies these theories can not be proven. By having an understanding of the molecular structure, routes of metabolism, related molecules binding assay, or other various assays, pharmacology, the physiology and anatomy (cytology specifically) of the human body, and molecular biology, one can theorize upon the potential dangers of a molecule.
Click to expand...
K, so knowing the entire area that you'll be effecting you know whether or not it will be dangerous or not.

How difficult is it for someone to produce their own batch of LSD? It seems so complex, but then again I really don't know much about chemistry other then my chem class in high school.

-djstrip
 
djstrip said:
How difficult is it for someone to produce their own batch of LSD? It seems so complex, but then again I really don't know much about chemistry other then my chem class in high school.
Click to expand...
Theres plenty of guides online on how to make a batch of LSD. Best of luck haha.
 
djstrip said:
I'm not asking for a guide, I was wondering how in depth the process is.

-djstrip
Click to expand...

Like, you have to be a chemist and have all the necessary equipment. That in depth enough for ya;)

Really though, yes, it is a very complex process to create LSD.
 
If you have a solid head on your shoulders with a few years of college level chemistry (intro, organic, and analytical) under the belt, with enough preparation and research one could theoretically synthesis LSD. However, having taken 2 full years of college level chemistry, I may have the laboratory skills to undertake the synthesis given a situation with the lab and materials available, but to actually plan out the route of synthesis in detail as well as gather the needed materials, I wouldn't have a chance. Not to mention all the potential dangers behind the production with LSD which certainly wouldn't be worth risk.

Its not something the average joe, or even above average Joe could set out to accomplish. It takes a lot of hard work with years of devotion to education, and can potentially cost you your life. Synthesizing drugs is serious business.

My best goes out to those who have lost their "lives" (even if they are still living) to hysteria of the drug war, by producing the precious molecule that is LSD.
 
Cloudy said:
Its not something the average joe, or even above average Joe could set out to accomplish. It takes a lot of hard work with years of devotion to education, and can potentially cost you your life. Synthesizing drugs is serious business.
Click to expand...

agreed. the above average joe extracts. the genius synths.

well except for meth - that the below average joe synths. and if it weren't for the overbearing controls placed on precursors - above average joes would probably synth up some MDMA. and maybe would take certain paths to LSD.
 
Cloudy said:
If you have a solid head on your shoulders with a few years of college level chemistry (intro, organic, and analytical) under the belt, with enough preparation and research one could theoretically synthesis LSD. However, having taken 2 full years of college level chemistry, I may have the laboratory skills to undertake the synthesis given a situation with the lab and materials available, but to actually plan out the route of synthesis in detail as well as gather the needed materials, I wouldn't have a chance. Not to mention all the potential dangers behind the production with LSD which certainly wouldn't be worth risk.

Its not something the average joe, or even above average Joe could set out to accomplish. It takes a lot of hard work with years of devotion to education, and can potentially cost you your life. Synthesizing drugs is serious business.

My best goes out to those who have lost their "lives" (even if they are still living) to hysteria of the drug war, by producing the precious molecule that is LSD.
Click to expand...
Yea, I imagine the tools necessary would be hard to come by to create it. Definitely would be cool to make your own though. I would love to be able to say that I know exactly what and how much of a specific substance I'm taking.
surf.shaman said:
agreed. the above average joe extracts. the genius synths.

well except for meth - that the below average joe synths. and if it weren't for the overbearing controls placed on precursors - above average joes would probably synth up some MDMA. and maybe would take certain paths to LSD.
Click to expand...

I actually watched a documentary where they showed a dea agent give a demonstration of how simple it is to make meth, pretty crazy. He went through what looked like the whole process, basically like a tutorial of how to make some at home, haha.

Thanks for the info everyone,

-djstrip
 
Very true. I would be nice to be in a situation where you could even just synth one batch. You will be set for life.

As sweet as that sounds I just wouldn't ever think I would be comfortable taking the risk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top