Lsa is very dreamy but has pretty mild visuals and a lot less euphoria. I don't take it anymore because for a day after I feel like complete SHIT. Most awful hangover ever.
If you're talking about morning glory seeds or HBWR, they often contain a whole bunch of ergoloids, not just LSA. This means that two people can think they're taking the same thing, but have the composition be drastically different based on genetics and environmental factors. That's why a lot of people have different experiences with what they call "LSA", some people find it to be a lot more visual or euphoric while others don't get much out of it besides nausea. When I did it, my stuff was very visual and very dreamy, with some of the deepest euphoria I've ever experienced, much like a "bumpier ride" version of LSD.
I think most people make the big mistake, that they assume these psychedelic vine seeds and LSA are basically the same. But as CrypticArc indicated there are also other ergolines in the seeds.
According to Hofmann's "later" opinion
the effects stem mainly from LSA, LSH and ergometrine. And e.g.
in fresher seeds there's mainly LSH (in relation to LSA).
Only in old seeds, the LSA is dominant. This is because
the fungi on the plant can only biosynthesize LSH (not LSA), and
LSA is then
a decomposition product of LSH over time.
Ergometrine is the precursor/intermediate in the biosynthesis of LSH and is so always also present. But the amount of ergometrine can strongly vary (depending on its production rate and how quickly it gets further converted to LSH). And yes, it is often not in amounts in the seeds to be considered a strong contributor of effects. So here I could at least a bit understand neglecting it's effects in naming.
I got the impression many
people are wrongly assuming that LSA is the only active ingredient in the seeds responsible for the effects.
I don't really know how this myth settled so solid.
Maybe because Hofmann wrongly assumed in his very first publication that LSA is the main component, but there were so many other publications following, where he corrected his mistake, that it's hard to believe this never got any attention at all.
So I'm really wondering why people are using these terms basically synonymous.
Hmm...Maybe because many
people seem to wrongly assume that these extraction teks only deliver LSA? But these
deliver at most (e.g. Kash's a/b extraction) a total alkaloid extraction. Although depending on PH and duration during the base step, it will convert a substantial amount of the LSH into LSA (which was likely also a reason why Hofmann came to the wrong conclusion in his first publication).
To get "pure LSA" there's no way around a more sophisticated procedure (e.g. like column chromatography), as their chemical properties are too similar.
Regarding the effects the different contributors have on their own (as derived from studies/experiments):
- LSA: Is mainly a sedativum and rather dysphoric (although stimulating and euphoric in very low doses), non visual (even in high doses), putting you in a dreamy, mentally kinda disconnected, self-reflective state. Severe bodily sideeffects on higher dosages (salivation, vomiting, giddiness, diarrhea).
- Ergometrine: Is visual in higher dosages, where also severe bodily side effects occur. Also headspace is typical "psychedelic" in these high dosages. Has been widely used in medicine in low doses due to its uterotonic effects (nowadays a chemical derivation of it gets used).
- LSH: Has never been tested by humans. Animal tests showed behavioral effects very similar to LSD. As the molecule is very similar to LAE-32, one might assume it is also visual and "psychedelic" similar to LSD (although less potent), but with a narcotic component (not as strong as LSA).
Quite some people have at least heard of LSH, but
have the wrong impression LSH would immediately be converted to LSA "in vivo". You can read this claim in a lot of articles on the net and in books, always claiming that Hofmann stated this. But it seems Hofmann never said this. All reference always Ott, in relation to this statement (which seems already fishy, as noone references Hofmann), as Ott claims this in his book, with a reference to a publication from Hofmann, but in this publication Hofmann nowhere makes this claim. Also in every other publication I could find from him, he never states anything like that, on the contrary he points out specifically also LSH (in every related work since 1971).
I have only one explanation, why Ott came to this conclusion: The translator for the english version of "Die Mutterkornalkaloide" ("the ergot alkaloids") made a huge
translation mistake (actually also many more...) and
so it read in the english version wrongly that LSH would easily decompose in acidic environments. Maybe Ott concluded from this, this would mean it wouldn't survive the digestive system, and so from Ott's POV Hofmann basically said in this publication, it would immediately decompose. And this would honestly be a correct conclusion, but as said, this was just a translation error, as
LSH is quite stable in acidic environments (actually more stable than in neutral conditions!). What
LSH cannot stand is
alkaline environments and high temps (boiling water will convert it to LSA very quickly, while quite some time at around 56°C don't seem to induce any large conversion yet, as this was part of Gröger's extraction process, boiling the acetone away, where at the end LSH was still dominant),
but this isn't a problem "in vivo", as blood is only very slightly alkaline, and the body never gets >56°C temp. Also
an analysis after a fatal accident
showed LSH in blood and urine after the ingestion of HBWR seeds. So much about the myth LSH gets immediately decomposed "in-vivo".
But back on topic:
Solms made a nice visual comparison chart between LSD, LAE-32, and LSA (LA in the pic), about their differences:
