Jamshyd
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2003
- Messages
- 15,492
Maybe not a "hyperbole" per-se, but it IS an exaggeration to show you that I think your (and many psychedelics-users) "macro-typing" logic isn't exactly convenient.That sounds like hyperbol to me. I am not against creating new and more specific names and categories, but you cant single handedly change the definition of a more general word on a whim. The established definition of psychedelic is pretty broad and inclusive with some very general criteria. If you want to be more specific I think you can do so by creating increasingly specific sub-categories. 'Classical 5HT2 Psychedelic', or dissociative psychedelic would be descriptions of increasing specificity,
References? Oh, and Strassman doesn't count .I am going on the absolute medical fact that endogenous DMT is released naturally in the brain during birth/death and dreaming. When you fall asleep and enter REM sleep the brain has just released its own endogenous DMT.
Your analogy is apples-to-oranges. You are talking about two drugs that work on the same transmitter system (regardless of direct-agonism or not). You also seem to be refering to the PNS, the effects of which are generally sensed only as increasing heart-rate, bronchodilation...etc., and not psychologically, which means that their effects can actually be measured completely via empirical means (ex. heart-rate).Lets compare two types of stimulants for an analogy with psychedelics. One stimulant stimulates the release of adrenaline from the adrenals and produces a stimulant effect, but is not directly an agonist to adrenaline receptors in the body. A second stimulant is an adrenaline analog and works on those receptors directly. They are both stimulants regardless of the lack of affinity the first chemical has with adrenaline receptors (I dont know their proper name).
And even then, you are still talking about two different compounds, one a direct agonist, one that isn't, on the same transmitter system. That does not compare to talking about psychoactive substances whose effects cannot be measured completely using empirical means since there is a subjective component.
[quote[A chemical doesnt have to have to have direct affinity for a receptor to either be a pro-drug for a chemical that does or else indirectly release an endogenous chemical that does in fact fit into those receptors.[/quote]
No it doesn't, but you keep missing the fact that I synthesized TWO criteria, never one without the other.
I'd love to see references for all this. It seems now you're not only generalizing terms, but actually generalizing theoretical pharmacology. Not only can everything be called psychedelic, but apparently everything can also trigger some esoteric endogenous psychedelics indirectly.Some of the deleriant psychedelics may contribute to the endogenous release of DMT, which also happens during REM sleep. They dont have to directly stimulate 5HT2 receptors to stimulate DMT or another such chemical which does.
Sorry, but I just don't buy it