Is acid now really more potent then from say the 80's?

[Delsyd]

that i dont doubt.

 

[Clusterone666]

ya there was a lot more back then, but oh ok i thought you said 60's sorry i wasn't reading that right. nvm. in the 60's it wasn't so much about money, but more about spreading good vibes and love and all that. now it's about who can make the most money :/

 

[Delta-9-THC]

The hits tended to be dosed higher (I have heard 250-300mcg was not uncommon) and it was cheaper and more plentiful apparently, but you can't make a blanket statement like that. There was weak acid and strong acid back then and there still is now. It is just more often weak or fake nowadays.

The chemical itself that is being produced is the same though.

 

[The Smoking Man]

The chemical itself that is being produced is the same though.

Except for the DOx and other shit masquerading as LSD.

 

[Ismene]

How can LSD be "more pure"? It's either LSD or it isn't.

 

[c3rta1nv0rz]

haha the greatest captain of all time! the only star trek dude i liked.

and the real life pickard is a man id like to hug.

we should appreciate his accomplishments as far as bringing the blessed molecule into existence. but i recently found out reading about him that he was busted in '89 (not 4 as large an operation obviously) and became a dea informant and had his case dropped, it's difficult for me to respect someone like that in most circumstances, although he was responsible for millions of doses so i guess he kinda redeemed himself.

 

[Shambles]

Well, cannabis now contains (supposedly) more psychoactive components per any weight of the plant you choose then it did in the past.

Not quite the case but pretty close, I'd think. There are far more varieties of high-potency, ton o' THC a toke with all the hybrids but there been weed of similar strength for a long time. It was just incredibly rare and expensive. There are probably a few strains tha are stronger but probably not by as much as most would think.

How can LSD be "more pure"? It's either LSD or it isn't.

The same any every other drug and most things in general is impure - it's got other stuff in it - traces of precursors not fully reacted, for example. Speaking of which...

one main reason people say 60's acid was stronger is that back then there were still Sandoz tablets commercially made and they were super strong by today's standards..

Check out Operation Julie - one of the biggest LSD busts ever and it was just up the road from here - the town I'm in gets a mention cos the cooks drank in the pub in town. Six million tabs seized and they were still cooking. Samples were sent to Sandoz for testing and Sandoz probably felt a bit embarrassed when they had to report that it was purer than any they had ever made. Purest LSD that's ever been made anywhere in fact, I believe. Rumoured to still be viable stashes in existence - if you have one of those stashes do say hello :D

Also, Operation Julie - LSD and the Brotherhood is a decent documentary about it. There's a full length one out there somewhere but it's a bugger to track down. Much like the fabled lost stashes :D

PS: Other fallacy that seems to be common - waaay more people take acid now then in the 60s. Those few were vocal about it so maybe sound like many, but they are few. The 60s as many think of them only really happened in a few cities around the world whilst everyone else tutted slightly at the length of their hair and brightness of their clothes and then went back to watching I Lucy.

 

[LysergicEpiphany]

Depends who and what you know and always will One Love

 

[crazyrabbit]

i took some 2010 hoffs that people are saying are the bomb and while nice clean feeling it was nothing like the potency of wow i used to get in the mid 90 from family but i still want totry the buddas i am hearing about ill b eatting some yinyang dolfins in a week or so ill report back

 

[solistus]

I think the average 'street' dose has probably always been under 100 mics, but perhaps it was easier to get a more direct hookup in the very early days of LSD distribution. At any rate, it's always about who you know. People pretty much say the acid was good during whatever time period they personally had the best connect. The range of quality between different supplies at any given time is definitely much bigger than any general trend over time of doses getting better or worse.

 

[Ismene]

The same any every other drug and most things in general is impure - it's got other stuff in it - traces of precursors not fully reacted, for example. Speaking of which...

But by definition you cannot have "impure" LSD. You can have an "impure" peice of paper with LSD on it but the LSD is either LSD or it isn't. LSD is a molecule with a precise chemical structure.

If the idea is there's other things on the blotter that are also psychoactive then what are they? I didn't think there were many "impurities" that were psychoactive at the same dose as LSD.

 

[moth.]

check out the book, "acid dreams, the complete social history of lsd: the cia the sixties and beyond" by martin a. lee and bruce shlain for more fun facts on our favorite compound.


for the record, i'm totally happy with all the L that i'v come across in the past two years. there have been some killer doses in the north east jam scene, and even if you need two it's still been really clean. grimy acid is the worst, glad i havent run into any in quite some time.

 

[Ismene]

for the record, i'm totally happy with all the L that i'v come across in the past two years. there have been some killer doses in the north east jam scene, and even if you need two it's still been really clean. grimy acid is the worst, glad i havent run into any in quite some time.

There's no such thing as clean or grimy acid is there. LSD is a molecule with a vast range of effects that you can interpret as being "clean" or "grimy". There's no mysterious molecule that makes you feel "grimy".

 

[Shambles]

^ Some synths are "cleaner" than others though. As mentioned in another thread - LSD is LSD but purity levels vary from batch to batch.

 

[SpecialK_]

ya there was a lot more back then, but oh ok i thought you said 60's sorry i wasn't reading that right. nvm. in the 60's it wasn't so much about money, but more about spreading good vibes and love and all that. now it's about who can make the most money :/

I think this has a lot to do with it, although I wasn't tripping in the 80s-90s so don't know for sure.

 

[psychomimetic]

Here's a list of stuff sold as LSD during the '60s and '70s- http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_history1.shtml

I think the acid back then was a bit more potent on average then it is now. The trouble is that most real hits back then were around 50-100 mics, but every so often there's one that's 300-500 mics. So you get used to taking 2-4 hits of the normal stuff and then BAM, you get totally blown away. Taking doses greater then 1 mg was fairly common back then, according to Grace Slick 600 mics is a "decent" dose of acid. In "Be Here Now" Ram Dass talks about giving an Indian guru 1,200 mics of sunshine acid (specially pressed for Ram Dass and measuring in at 300 mics each) and seeing the guy go basically unaffected, which is incredable. I've heard a lot of stories of people taking very high doses of acid back then as a fairly common occurance.

Here's a guy who's responsible for turning on several major figures in the 1960s acid scene- http://www.erowid.org/culture/characters/hollingshead_michael/hollingshead_michael.shtml
He got a gram of lsd and mixed it together in a mayonnaise jar with icing. Apparently his first trip was from licking the spoon he'd used to mix the stuff. According to the erowid page he made 200 ug doses, but I've read stuff that said that he sometimes would give someone a heaping spoonfull of it for a trip.

I can't remember where I read this, but I think it was in a biography of Timothy Leary. According to what I read (or heard, I really don't remember where and I can't find anything about it online), Timothy Leary's son would sometimes take upwards of 10 mg of lsd. I read in his biography that when Timothy Leary was doing the commune type deal he would dose acid out, but refuse to tell people how much he had dosed into the medium. During one period he would dose people by dipping a stick into acid solution and having them lick it, and another time he had some alcohol bottles that were dosed with acid sitting out for people to take as they wished, but he refused to say how much the doses were. Timothy Leary was a reckless asshole who really fucked things up in terms of psychedelic drug law and the 1960s in general.

Here's another archive of blotter hits from the late '70s and the '80s, and the acid in it is notably weaker (generally) then the stuff in the 1960s. There's also a lot less of the high dose hits then there were in the 1960s and '70s archive at the beginning of the post.
http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_blotter_microgram_1987.pdf

If only acid was legal, we could know how much of what substance we were taking when we dosed.

 

[Chaos23]

I REALLY miss this one:

We had SO much of it. It was beautiful. We would get it from my friend in California who was getting it from the dude who laid it on the paper. Until he went to prison.

There was a second batch that wasn't as good. Anyone else remember this gem from 1995ish?

 

[SpecialK_]

i took some 2010 hoffs that people are saying are the bomb and while nice clean feeling it was nothing like the potency of wow i used to get in the mid 90 from family but i still want totry the buddas i am hearing about ill b eatting some yinyang dolfins in a week or so ill report back

The hofmann 2010s are a much lower dosage compared to previous hofmann batches such as the 2000s and previous to that. If by buddas you mean Ganeshas they are quite a nice trip but likewise with the hofmann 2010s 1 will get you nowhere.