Heirarchy of LSD

[TAPPER]

My conclusion, 100% pure; Freshly & properly stored LSD, is very rear to find

It is not only the original type of crystal that matters, but how fresh it is as well.

I wasn’t even going to get into this aspect of this discussion after seeing how the purity issue was going, but ….what the hell.

Once upon a time some kind folk were waiting for their blessed sacrament to arrive from the Promised Land. Although I did not participate in laying the sheets myself, massive amounts of still damp pure white sheet emerged from a grungy hotel room. As business was conducted one mentioned how lucky we were because this was laid from a fresh batch of crystal. Before realizing the significance of that statement one asked me if I wanted to lick his fingers. (he had been handling large amounts of paper and his fingers were sopping wet at this time) Initially hesitant, (he was fairly dirty and it seemed like quite a gay thing to do) it was obvious he was getting extremely high really quick and I wanted in. This single action resulted in one of the most powerful and truly unique psychedelic experience of my entire life. Although I have subsequently taken large or larger amounts of lsd on numerous occasions, they have all offered a “similar” experience quite different from my few brushes with what I believe to be fresh cid.

 

[LikuidKid]

^^^
LOL because I have some idea of what I'm talking about? Or because I don't mind admitting the things I'm not sure of?

the latter.

 

[cyberdelica]

clean could be the analog 52

^^^
No way. Anyone who's sampled a fair share of L can tell the difference in purity. Clean L will feel better on the body and give less of a jittery feeling and probably less anxiety overall.

If purity didn't matter then the terms "clean acid" and "dirty acid" woudn't exist. Every old hippie I've met agrees that they can easily tell the difference between a pure and an impure batch.

 

[eCsTaSy NoN sToP]

If they had a viable route that didn't go via the LSD stage, you'd think they would be shouting about it to everyone in sight, because that would have been the proof that they hadn't needed to manufacture a controlled drug in manufacturing ALD-52. In that sort of a position, I know I'd be telling everyone.

there is a synthesis route that does not involve LSD as a product, by-product, intermediary, etc... i'm trying my hardest to find it, but i can't... i believe it might've been on rhodium... anyways, the synthesis is identical, with the exception that the d-lysergic acid hydrate is acetylated before the diethylamine/phosphoroxychloride step, thus eliminating the need for LSD, per se.

 

[eCsTaSy NoN sToP]

the problem was that the prosecution stated that for all intents and purposes it hydrolizes to LSD and since the body is a big hydrolitic instrument, regardless of the fact that LSD is never made or handled, for all intents and purposes ALD-52 is LSD. and the court agreed, edit:major LSD chemists (for those who are too f*cking politically correct) went to jail, etc etc...

 

[fastandbulbous]

You'd think that the defence would have pointed out that anyone capable of manufacturing a drug like ALD-52, would also be able to keep it in a moisture free atmosphere, thereby preventing hydrolysis (in an airtight container with a dessicating agent like anhydrous calcium chloride - not difficult at all). The next step would be that it must have hydrolysed because of the way it was handled by non-chemically trained cops allowing moisture to come into contact with the ALD-52 (so technically, the cops were responsible for the 'manufacture' of LSD from ALD-52).

It's a continuity of evidence problem - a big enough technicallity to get someone off the charge, you'd think

 

[cyberdelica]

lol well the fda made the damnrules so if a chemist can bend the drug into isomer that works FUCK the govt that wants to decide what i want to do with my consciousness...hell women can have abortions we cant even CHANGE our minds

With the interest recently in the drug ALD-52 on this group I
thought the following extract from 'The Brotherhood of Eternal Love'
by Stewart Tendler & David May, Panther Books, England 1984 might
be useful:

'Windsor [US lab] was not producing lSD but ALD-52, similar but
not illegal, or so [Tim] Scully believed. Scully found the ALD
formula among scientific papers and books in the specialist
library at Berkeley. It was a compound [Albert] Hofmann had tested
years before. At the University of California Medical Center(sic),
Scully uncovered the scientific paper Hofmann and a colleague had
published on the drug. From the US Patent Office he drew patent
number 2,810,723, lodged by Sandoz with production details. In The
Hallucinogens co-authored by Osmond and Hofmann, Scully discovered
a table comparing the effects of ALD and other drugs in the same
family.

The table suggested that ALD might actually have advantages over
LSD, reducing any side effects but achieving a stronger trip.
Measurements of brain waves while people were taking the two drugs
showed that while LSD produced brain waves associated with intense
concentration and anxiety, ALD produced brain waves showing a more
relaxed mental state.

There was one snag. Hofmann's formula meant making LSD first, then
converting it into ALD. Although the finished product might be legal
, at a crucial stage in its production it was illegal. The solution
was a simple reversal in the order of production so that at no time
was the drug illegal. Neither Hitchcock nor the Brothers were told
of ALD. Hitchcock had been badly burned financially when STP had
picked up a bad name on the streets. It was thought he would oppose
ALD as yet another innovation that would prove difficult to sell.
The drug was simply labelled 'acid', and he and the Brotherhood
were none the wiser.'

---------------------------------------------------------------

ALD-52: N-Acetyl-LSD.

According to the _Psychedelics Encyclopedia_, ALD-52 is rather commonly
found on the street sold as LSD-25. However, it also claims that ALD-52
is actually a smoother trip than LSD. Either way, ALD-52 tends to
decompose into LSD-25 rather quickly, so I really doubt the quality is
changed that much.

And medium level dealers get whatever the hell the chemist makes. They're
just as confused as you are as to the content.

 

[d-ranie]

Also the analog law would probably come into effect; If you can add a methyl, or replace a -H with a -Cl;then acetylation wouldn't be much greater than a methyl substitution by weight, and in the long run less weighty than a -Br for a -H. But I wouldn't want to find out first hand how or where they draw the line

 

[eCsTaSy NoN sToP]

You'd think that the defence would have pointed out that anyone capable of manufacturing a drug like ALD-52, would also be able to keep it in a moisture free atmosphere, thereby preventing hydrolysis (in an airtight container with a dessicating agent like anhydrous calcium chloride - not difficult at all). The next step would be that it must have hydrolysed because of the way it was handled by non-chemically trained cops allowing moisture to come into contact with the ALD-52 (so technically, the cops were responsible for the 'manufacture' of LSD from ALD-52).

It's a continuity of evidence problem - a big enough technicallity to get someone off the charge, you'd think

no no no no no no no.....

ALD-52 doesn't hydrolize by simply being exposed to air...
the HUMAN BODY is a HYDROLITIC instrument and once you ingest ALD-52 it is hydrolized to LSD-25... undastand? it has nothing to do with them storing it or the ALD-52 degrading into LSD-25 when stored and so being stuck with an illegal chemical or not having proper equipment or experience or whatever...

 

[fastandbulbous]

^ yes it does, if something becomes a controlled substance through metabolic processes, the person cannot be charged with possession of the metabolic precursor if the precursor isn't illegal (if that were the case, people ingesting codeine would end up being charged with possession of morphine - do you understand?). It's ALL about it's hydrolysis (it means split by water) after synthesis, and there are plenty of drugs that hydrolyse at room temp through exposure to air containing moisture - go take the top off an aspirin bottle and take a whiff. Aspirin ( O-acetylsalicylic acid) hydrolyses to salicylic and acetic acid - that's why you can smell vinegar.

I'm in a good mood, so I'll not be scathing about your certainty that you're right; just read a bit first before being so certain

 

[eCsTaSy NoN sToP]

it's not about hydrolysis after the synthesis, rather the hydrolysis that happens when you ingest it, like it or not... here, i'll even quote Shulgin for ya:

ALD-52. 1-Acetyl-N,N-diethyllysergamide. This material has been explored in the 50-175 microgram range and there are a number of human trials reported, with varying conclusions. One found that there was less visual distortion than with LSD and it seems to produce less anxiety and was somewhat less potent than LSD. Another report claimed it was more effective in increasing blood pressure. Yet another could not tell them apart. ALD-52 just may have been the drug that was sold as "Orange Sunshine" during the "Summer of Love" in the late '60's. Or "Orange Sunshine" may have been, really, LSD. This was the focus of a fascinating trial where two defendants were accused of distributing LSD, whereas they claimed that it was ALD-52 which was not an illegal drug. The prosecution claimed that as it hydrolyses readily to LSD, for all intents and purposes it was LSD, and anyway, you had to go through the illegal LSD to get to ALD-52 by any of the known chemical syntheses. The defendants were found guilty. And yet, I do not know who has actually measured the speed or ease of that reaction. If ALD-52 hydrolyses so easily to LSD, and the body is indeed a hydrolytic instrument, then these two drugs should be absolutely equivalent in every particular, This is the ergot equivalent of the psilocybin to psilocin argument, except this is an acetamide rather than a phosphate ester.

i'm gonna go look for the docket info on the ald-52 case and i'll definitely be back with it... you can COUNT on that fastandbulbous...

 

[fastandbulbous]

The prosecution claimed that as it hydrolyses readily to LSD

When it hydrolyses in the body it's called metabolism, when it occurs outside the body, it's called hydrolysis.

If you could be charged with the body causing the drug to come into existence, we'd all be guilty for endogenous synthesis of DMT. All 1-acetyltryptamines are pronr to hydrolysis to the parent tryptamine due to the action of atmospheric moisture - just like aspirin

 

[eCsTaSy NoN sToP]

kay, let's just stop right now cause you're not telling me anything new and we're simply beating a dead horse... if you don't believe even Shulgin, then i have no idea who you'll believe, so you're just a big unbeliever... technicality or not, the government gets it their way, especially when they have such a big prize (like a major LSD chemist) in their claws...

 

[eCsTaSy NoN sToP]

but just for you, straight out of the encyclopedia, the definition of hydrolysis:

Chemical reaction in which the action of water or its ions breaks down a substance into smaller molecules. Hydrolysis occurs in certain inorganic salts in solution, in nearly all non-metallic chlorides, in esters, and in other organic substances. It is one of the mechanisms for the breakdown of food by the body, as in the conversion of starch to glucose.

 

[mindsurfer]

ecstacy-non-stop: If you're going to get on your high horse, you ought to at least get your facts straight. Owsley (Bear) was not a part of the ALD-52 trial. It was Scully and Sand.

Further, what F&B has posted is accurate, and nothing you've posted has refuted it.

 

[fastandbulbous]

If you understood organic chemistry, you'd see that digestion of food is enzyme mediated hydrolysis (with amylase splitting the 1,6 bonds in the case of starch). I'm talking about hydrolysis without the intervention of enzymes (aspirin example again), which means that it can occur anywhere, not just inside the body (starch is very stable until it has enzymes let loose on it - or it wouldn't have been used as wallpaper paste in the past).

Just quoting bits out of an encyclopaedia, without understanding the context, doesn't mean much at all

 

[eCsTaSy NoN sToP]

insulting comment edited out

As disclosed in a 1952 U.S. Patent to Sandoz Pharmaceuticals by
the team of Stoll, Troxler, and (Albert) Hofmann, lysergic acid
is first converted to the diethylamide (LSD) by any of the known
routes, and then acetylated to synthesize ALD-52:

acetyl'n
Lysergic acid --> LSD --> 1-acetyl-LSD

With a published potency of 90% of LSD, but at the time completely
legal to possess, Sand and Scully came up with the tentatively
brilliant idea of simply reversing the reaction order in order to
make manufacture legal as well (Tendler & May (infra); "Interview:
Michael Kennedy" [Sand and Scully's lawyer], "High Times" (Jan.
1977)).

By performing the acetic anhydride acetylation first, followed by
the preparation of the diethylamide, they avoided the illegal LSD
intermediate:

acetyl'n
Lysergic acid --> 1-acetyllysergic acid -> 1-acetyl-LSD

Though such reaction flipping is in general of uncertain utility
(it's completely reaction and reactant-dependent), in this case it
works (cf. Johnson (1973)).

And as an unpublished route, effectively Sand and Scully had come
up with a new synthesis of ALD-52 -- which they soon put to use by
manufacturing large amounts of it at a farmhouse lab in Windsor,
California in 1969.

Millions of "Orange Sunshine" hits later, at their 1974 trial in San
Francisco, initially incredulous government chemists quickly recovered
from their shock at the duo's inventiveness, by countering that even
if they hadn't:

1) made LSD, or
2) made LSD at some stage in the reaction,

since ALD-52 was extremely unstable to moisture, and would decompose
to LSD soon after tableting (and, of course, on intake), they were
still criminally liable.

from http://www.erowid.org/psychoactives/faqs/faq_clandestine_chemistry.shtml

so you're ONLY PART RIGHT, and i'm also ONLY PART RIGHT... now let's go on with the thread...

oh, and mindsurfer, mind your own biz. nobody was talking to you, and it's very impolite to butt in like an asshole

 

[fastandbulbous]

since ALD-52 was extremely unstable to moisture

Which is what I was saying in the first place, about the defence claiming that the LSD could have occurred due to the way the arresting agents had handled the drug.

ALD-52 doesn't hydrolize by simply being exposed to air

I can see the bit you were incorrect about (above), but I cannot see any factual error in what I've stated

PS. To argue/discuss the merits of an arguement is one thing, but don't start with the out and out insulting comments unless you want your posts edited, or worse. We're trying to be intelligent about the top[ics up for discussion here

 

[eCsTaSy NoN sToP]

no really now... you don't see any incorrect factual info that you posted? here, let me quote it for you...

When it hydrolyses in the body it's called metabolism

no, when hydrolysis takes place in the body it's called... *drum roll* HYDROLYSIS

 

[Cat Again]

this is so rediculous.