[Book] DMT the Spirit Molecule

[Shambles]

Back in the late 70's we were allowed to read stuff like that in school. Nowadays the public thought is we can't have our kids reading that stuff. The next thing you know is children are allergic to peanuts...

I also recall Dewey Decimal classes at school. Would've been really pissed off to have gone the whole University route on that one - these times they are a-changing :D

 

[swilow]

And despite that the theory is not scientifically proven, it does make sense. (Melatonin, a close relative of DMT, is secreted by the pineal gland.)

Well, serotonin is found in the pineal gland too, and is "related" to melatonin...still doesn't mean DMT is from the pineal.

 

[9.7]

I'm about half way though with the book and honestly it was a waste of money. My only motivation for reading it at this point is to hear about the trips the volunteers had!

 

[SizzleSword]

I would think that since both serotonin and melatonin were found in the pineal gland, if DMT was there, it would have been found as well.

 

[Poppin.Knowledge]

Well call me a conspiracy theorist, but the pineal gland was named after it's resemblance to a pine cone, if you look up pineal in a dictionary it literally is referring to pine cones and such. Ok... so guess what the largest sculpture at the vatican is? A fucking pine cone. I'm serious there's this huge pine cone, it's gigantic, and that's not all. Next to this pine cone are these two egyptian looking birds, there's hieroglyphics at the base, and last but not least there's an open sarcophagus alluding to eternal life. Ok so there's a monstrous statue of a pinecone , and the vatican even named the area the 'court of the pinecone'. How's that for a conspiracy, eh?
It is at least safe to say that the world is much, much more complicated then how we normally pretend it is, no?

 

[Delta-9-THC]

How's that for a conspiracy, eh?
It is at least safe to say that the world is much, much more complicated then how we normally pretend it is, no?

^lol wut?

True, reality is very complex and in many ways alien to us and we certainly try to simplify our conception/perception of it in order to make sense of it but I don't see how that has anything to do with a sculpture of a pinecone at the vatican.

 

[Poppin.Knowledge]

Dude its the vatican...why is the largest sculpture a fucking pine cone... when i see that it's like "something just doesn't compute"

 

[guerillabedlam]

I actually really dislike the book, in retrospect. It great that Strassman was able to open up psychedelic research again, but with the conclusions and ridiculous hypotheses he came up with, we'd be better without it.

Damn this post along,with a couple others are being some pretty tough critics in my opinion.

The man goes through loops and obstacles just to be allowed to experiment on volunteers with DMT, a schedule 1 compound that has not been experimented with in 40 years and then actually gets a book published on it. That alone should be worth praise and respect.

I agree that some of his theories are not completely sound and he may be wrong about dmt's role in the human body, but the book was done and written in a scientific enough manner to maybe actually warrant further research of psychedelic compounds among scientists.

While I think people like Terrence Mckenna and Daniel Pinchbeck are great, I think it's easy for the scientific community to dismiss their writings because they are way more speculative than Strassman.

Just to let the people know who enjoyed this book, Strassman is a coauthor of a new book that i'm pretty sure mainly focuses on Ayahuasca.(I just skimmed through it) My browser is acting up right now and I forgot the name, I'm sure you could google it and find it fairly easily if you so choose.

 

[swilow]

Damn this post along,with a couple others are being some pretty tough critics in my opinion.

The man goes through loops and obstacles just to be allowed to experiment on volunteers with DMT, a schedule 1 compound that has not been experimented with in 40 years and then actually gets a book published on it. That alone should be worth praise and respect.

Why should that be worthy of praise and respect? Good on him and all, but I just feel he went too far with his theories, partcularly linking the formation of the pineal at 49 days after conception with his own Tibetan buddhism beliefs.

Also, he states that the pineal is the only single organ in the brain not divided by hemisperes, which has also been found to be untrue.

He does mention though, that DMT could as easily be synthessed in the lungs as the brain.

Also- he's used DMT, so he had no real impartiality.

 

[EntheoDjinn]

.......Also- he's used DMT, so he had no real impartiality.

That's a bit unfair swilow. We humans are seamlessly embedded in the reality we choose to divide up and categorise scientifically. A search for "real impartiality" as you define it could exclude important subjective data and exclude the majority of researchers from very important fields of study.

Do we only accept research findings on alcohol from workers who have never imbibed? Or psychological musings on the effect of TV/videos etc from researchers who have never seen such technological inventions or particular programme types?

I grant you that the intensity of psychedelic experiences must undoubtedly "flavour" the approach and cogitations of a researcher, but science is just an approach to understanding events/experiences, in a world we socially construct as we go along and not the whole picture. This is especially so when the effect of such an experience has a profound and direct impact on human consciousness (as opposed to say, research on simple tastes or smells).

Science can provide a substantial, but incomplete version of affairs in which it is interested, but the very restrictions imposed by scientific method (e.g. to remove subjectivity) render experiments involving consciousness to an extent quite incomplete.

I would be very suspicious of workers who hadn't tried a particular substance drawing major conclusions - ecstasy is a case in point. Much of the research has been carried out by people who haven't used it. However, they don't seemed to have managed to eliminate subjective variables such as political expediency/propaganda from there findings, and they are held up by much of the scientific community to be carrying out bona fide research (except for Ricaurte et al of course ).

And this is of course, just my humble opinion and, very subjective .

 

[Ismene]

I'm not sure about the "DMT released at death" theory. Most of the near-death experiences I've read about don't sound anywhere near as psychedelic as a DMT trip.

 

[guerillabedlam]

Why should that be worthy of praise and respect? Good on him and all, but I just feel he went too far with his theories, partcularly linking the formation of the pineal at 49 days after conception with his buddhism beliefs.

Because it takes time and money to do a study like this, and while it has gotten some attention (alot of it to do with his book) dmt is still a pretty obscure chemical. If I remember correctly, he originally didn't even set out to study dmt.

 

[Ismene]

I didn't like his attempts to link it to tibetan buddhism either. It's bollocks to link them - but hen again perhaps that's the best way of pleasing the authorities. If you make out "it's like buddhism" then perhaps they're less inclined to attack you than if you say "It's great for getting fucked up on".

 

[swilow]

Because it takes time and money to do a study like this, and while it has gotten some attention (alot of it to do with his book) dmt is still a pretty obscure chemical. If I remember correctly, he originally didn't even set out to study dmt.

Well it takes me time and money to drive to work, but I'm pretty sure I haven't discovered the secrets of the universe in doing so. Plus I'M setting out to definitely go to work. :D

EntheoDjinn, the imparrtiality bit is probably only important in psychedelic studies, as we all know that a simple bodly gesture can lead to endless thought-tripping. Maybe even a single thought-bubble.

I thnk some people here think I'm being cynical, but really, I just don't like the book. I'm glad he did the research- BUT- he didn't come to any real conclusions. Sure, its a good read and sits proudly in my book case, but I don't think its a book worthy of being called science. This isn't me thinking scence is the be-all end -all; I don't really favour science particularly, but the Spirit Molecule basically reminds me of anything Leary wrote, minus the huge ego.

 

[guerillabedlam]

Well it takes me time and money to drive to work, but I'm pretty sure I haven't discovered the secrets of the universe in doing so. Plus I'M setting out to definitely go to work. :D

I'm glad he did the research- BUT- he didn't come to any real conclusions. Sure, its a good read and sits proudly in my book case, but I don't think its a book worthy of being called science.

Yes it takes you time and money to get to work and you're not going through the hassle of getting FDA/DEA/ and who knows what else approvals to even BEGIN your study, and let me add a study on human subjects not mice or little mammals.

I have no problem if you didn't like the book, I am actually quite hesitant with many of the conclusions he arrived at as well. But you said we would be better off without it and that I can't agree with you at all. Why can't I agree with this ? Because there has been very few if any scientist,psychologist, or philosophers that has got IT right all by themselves. I'll use a psychology example since Strassman is a psychologist.

Freud was controversial in his time and in fact many of his theories were not very popular. Most of his early studies were done on himself, which hardly seems scientific. Today, Freud's version of psychoanalysis is pretty much completely disregarded by academia of having any merit. All that being said Freud's work is arguably the most important produced material in psychology ever released. Why? Because peers and those who followed him built upon his foundation.

For this same reason this is why I think Strassman's work was so important. While it may have uncessarily had some of his buddhist beliefs incorporated and he may go a bit out on a limb with some of this theories, he has opened up the field of psychedelic research in a scientific manner that hasn't been seen since the 60's. Strassman didn't provide all the answers but he did lay a solid foundation.

 

[romsoccer12]

i agree with guerilla. the reports of NDE sound nothing like a DMT trip at all, but maybe it could have a small impact?
IMO, all those theories he brought up just gave me more evidence he got nowhere with his research. i feel he couldve done other and better things given the oppurtunity. still a great book with all the trip reports and even though his theories are a little far fetched, still a good thing to think about!

 

[swilow]

Yes it takes you time and money to get to work and you're not going through the hassle of getting FDA/DEA/ and who knows what else approvals to even BEGIN your study, and let me add a study on human subjects not mice or little mammals.

I still don't see how thats worthy of respect and praise. Strassman wanted to do this research; he didn't matyr himself for the cause, this was his passion....

For this same reason this is why I think Strassman's work was so important. While it may have uncessarily had some of his buddhist beliefs incorporated and he may go a bit out on a limb with some of this theories, he has opened up the field of psychedelic research in a scientific manner that hasn't been seen since the 60's. Strassman didn't provide all the answers but he did lay a solid foundation.

Foundation for what? All over the internet, we have people who "KNOW" that dreaming is caused by DMT, DMT is releleased at birth and death and at 49 days past conception; its also "known" that the pineal gland releases it, and that DMT probably accounts for most NDE or alien-abduction experiences. Now- none of these things are claimed empyrically by Strassman, but he suggests it and it gets amplified into truths, which actually make it more difficult for the layperson to understand what DMT is. In my opinon, his conclusions were wrong and unfortuntely reach an audience who is easily fooled by the word "Doctor".

 

[Delta-9-THC]

Agreed. This is the real problem with this work. These ideas get perpetuated as complete truth so much that they are all that most people (think they) know about DMT.

 

[Teotzlcoatl]

I still don't see how thats worthy of respect and praise.

You don't see how his work is worthy of praise and respect?

WTF have you done for the entheogenic community?!

At least he's a serious scientist doing SOMETHING relating to entheogens!

Agreed. This is the real problem with this work. These ideas get perpetuated as complete truth so much that they are all that most people (think they) know about DMT.

Now I do agree with that, but that isn't his fault!

BTW you can call him if you'd like...

 

[Delta-9-THC]

Does he really charge 100 bucks to speak with him or were you joking? If that's true that's pretty ridiculous.