• N&PD Moderators: Skorpio | thegreenhand

  • Neuroscience & Pharmacology Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Recent Journal Articles Chemistry Mega-Thread
    FREE Chemistry Databases! Self-Education Guide

LSD analogues

Yeah using those tablets wouldn't even be worth doing. Sterile cultures are the way most go, not all that hard to do as the pharma industry has been doing it for a long time so there's a lot of documentation on it around. This would be much easier to do than a seed extraction even and the source is replenishable. Ergoloids are some of the few substances closely regulated in Asia so there are no unmonitored factories there, that's what I've been told from a multitude a people there. Most illegal sources are actually in europe from what I'm to understand. Pretty sure this thread is close to breaking rules but I like it when you talk dirty to me.
 
^It would be more practical to culture claviceps, but it's no shroom growing or beer brewing. Second problem is it took decades of research to find a strain that would produce ergoloids in a solution. Some brilliant scientists devoted almost their whole careers to it and failed. Even a lot of strains grown on live grain will not make good yields of ergoloids. And when you do find a producer strain you have to find the exact nutrients to get ergoloids. Plus some are prone to mutating into a non-producer.

I've heard rumors of a direct biosynthesis of LSD, but I don't see how that would be possible.

Ergonovine is pretty common in obstetrics. It stops bleeding and induces contractions. I don't know, maybe it's been replaced.

Other lysergic acid derivetives interest me. In particular Lysergic acid 2,4-dimethylazetidide(LSZ) and ALD-52. LSZ is a little bit more potent in rats, but I wonder if that's true for humans. The 2-butyl/pentyl sound interesting too. Also how would the effects compare? Some of those less potent analogs might actually have better effects. Who know if the best trips come from something active in the mg range?

Have the lysergamides of different amphetamines been synthesis?
 
^Yeah the fact that decades of research went into it is what makes it so much easier at this point in time. There are a number of papers regarding best substrates, extraction techniques, ect so it's a lot less trial and error and more about reading readily available information. Known producer strains are even sold and traded if you talk to the right people. I've even seen them offered publicly a few times. Their are a tons of people who've had success and their work is splattered all over other forums for anyone who'd like to read up on it.
 
Even if the analogues were "better" (as if you can say that about psychedelics), those who love LSD would probably not like them as much, whereas others might like them more. It's a lot like the whole MXE/Ketamine deal - personal preference, YMMV etc.

I think they would have different aspects which some people prefer, but even that is difficult when psychedelics are SO reliant on set and setting.

Either way, the widespread popularity that LSD has will be hard to match. No physical side-effects, euphoric and recreational at first followed by a deeper stage, solid duration but enough that you can sleep in the same 24 hours. It's got a lot going for it.
 
trip.more said:
Yeah the fact that decades of research went into it is what makes it so much easier at this point in time.
Click to expand...
Issac Newton said:
If I have seen further it is by standing on ye sholders of Giants
Click to expand...
trip.more said:
Known producer strains are even sold and traded if you talk to the right people.
Click to expand...
The ones I've seen may require some culturing, selecting, and/or even mutating. Also some are prone to reverting to non-producer, though there are ways to fix that. Not trying to be discouraging, I have heard of some success with them.It'd be great if some great culture were going around like shroom spores. Although I bet the best strains are proprietary, hidden away in Sandoz labs.

Really I think cottage industry is the way of the future.Let a thousand flowers bloom=D!
Transforms said:
the widespread popularity that LSD has will be hard to match
Click to expand...
I wish it were more widespread and popular:(. Then world would be a better place. Though I agree that Hoffmann's "Problem Child" is hard to beat. Nichols may have come close, although I haven't heard many trip reports with his lysergamides.
 
Someone explain LSZ, it's supposed to be amazing.
Also, ALD-52 is another that's supposed to be like the most perfect trip
 
The perfect trip is a product of set and setting, not the drug itself.

What one person looks for, a deep, introspective psychedelic, may be another's disappointing experience.
 
LSZ is an informal name for lysergic acid dimethylazetidide, developed by David Nichols. In rats it's slightly more potent than LSD. Not sure about Homo Sapiens. The infamous LSD chemist Pickard hoped it would be an alternative to LSD, possible superior. For some reason they found it not to be true. I don't know if had inferior effects/safety, was weaker in humans, or was harder to mass produce.

ALD-52 is the acetyl amide of LSD, made by Albert Hoffmann. Mole for mole it's equipotent to LSD. However some have claimed it's a more mellow trip, some studies found it produced more vasoconstriction or less visuals. Rather contradictory info out there. Krystal Cole of neurosoup, ex-wife of ubersnitch Skinner and acquaintance of Pickard, claimed it was like a mixture of Valium and LSD. Also the chemists Tim Scully and Nick Sand claimed that the famous "Orange Sunshine" was ALD-52. Said they switched the steps around to avoid making a controlled substance. Sadly the courts didn't see it their way. Prosecutors argued that the only way to make it was through LSD(proof they were in possession of LSD) , that it readily hydrolyzed into LSD, and it should be considered for all practical purposes LSD. They got fucked.

It's been said that ALD is just like Psilocybin to Psilocin, but I think the amide might be more stable.

I'm fascinated by the LSD analogs. Too bad lysergic acid's CIII, it'd be harder for the RC makers to make them.
 
sekio said:
No, he speaks truth, the other lysergamides are active, but most of them are around 1/4 to 1/10 the potency of LSD.

Other known analopgs are the 2-pentyl and 2-butyl amides, & methyl isopropyl amide.

I'm pretty sure none of these are sold at "street level" though - if you're able to get ergotamine & a lab but cant make diethylamine... that says something
Click to expand...

Good conversation here, funny thing is nick sand has said that diethylamine acquisition was the biggest bitch in his 90's run in British Columbia. Dunno how things have changed, but the classic "bomb" synthesis was purportedly much more of a bitch than it appeared on paper. Admittedly, Sand had the sweet connection for ergoloids, and so "biggest bitch" might need to be put into perspective ;)

I have had what was purported to be ALD-52, and yes, from not your usual source, but I noticed no difference from LSD.
 
LSZ probably never took off for two reasons.
1. It introduces 2 new chiral centers. That's (for the uneducated) 75% of the "inactive" isomers and only 25% of the "best" isomer per synthesis. Add that to LSD being chiral and you have a measly 12.5% yield for racemic syntheses.

2. Five and six membered rings (pyrrolidines and piperidines) are intrinsically quite stable. Azetidine (four membered ring) is not.
 
I think that ALD is just a prodrug for LSD like psilocybin is for psilocin. Firstly, the indole nitrogen is much less basic than regular amines so hydrolysis is much easier, though maybe not as easy as for psilocybin where phosphatases may play a role, but certainly feasible. Secondly, I think that the electron density on the nitrogen is important for binding and in ALD most of the electron density is residing on the oxygen of the acetamide. This would be easy to ascertain in a binding assay, but I don't think anybody ever bothered to try it
 
I was just reading up on that compound 'lysergic acid 2,4-dimethylazetidide'. On first sight I laughed at it. If you thought LSD was hard to keep in it's unique isomer, then this compound would be unimaginably difficult to deal with. It has 5 stereocenters. That means that racemic lysergic acid 2,4-dimethylazetidide is only 2^(-5) parts it's more potent isomer in a whole. That fraction comes out to 1/32. LSD is only 1/4. However, assuming you aminated the lysergic acid pyrazole with the 2,4-dimethylazetidide in the correct isomer it wouldn't be that difficult provided that the conditions were that both molecules stayed in their correct isomer the entire time.

This is not synthesis information. Just saying that depending of the stability of the dimethyazetidide in it's correct isomer, it maybe hard to get it to work with the lysergic skeleton in it's correct isomer with out some extreme racemization going on. At first glance this compound probably wouldn't be suitable to make it to the streets because of stability and synthesis problems. (Like I said 32 different isomers, only one being the most potent and racemic mix is not really an option when it comes to lysergides or whatever they are called.)
 
Last edited:
Yes sockpuppet, I have heard the same thing, the "ald-52" defense was just that, an attempt at a defense. And funny about the "bromomescaline", 2CB was STILL being sold as such in Portland and San Fransisco as late as the early 90's. And, to go for the third ditto in a row, there is a thread somewhere in PD about LSD analogues in which that same point was made about how forensic chemists would have LOVED to have found LSX somewhere in this "euro LSD". Hasnt happened. It is a very valid point. Good thread and discussion, if you can find it.

Funny how the poster above ("sir rolls a Lott") says "LSZ" is supposed to be amazing. All that exists is some binding studies, a lot of conjecture, and that assumption that this is what Pickard was attempting to do. I agree, and have, that this is a valid assumption, but how did we go from this to the lore amongst the kiddies as "amazing"?
 
I must have gotten names mixed up, regardless either ALD-52 or LSZ is supposed to create a much more anxiety/paranoia/tension free trip. Like I said, I can't remember which one I heard that about but I find that extremely interesting
 
ALD is certainly supposed to, but I still think set and setting add larger error bars than the drugs themselves do.
 
I think Nichols preparation was stereospecific. But he does mention that the precursor was hard to make and other methods failed. Also he did it on a test tube scale.

Most LSD cooks use Hoffmann's synthesis, dangerous but effective. Although Casey Hardison did used Nichols method for LSD.Sadly Hardison got busted perfecting the synthesis. IMO Hardison's a more worthy martyr than the snitch Pickard, but a bit too idealistic for his own good.

Making "LSZ" would probably fail with traditional methods. Published methods may have not scaled up well. And it does seem like it'd be pretty unstable. And if it's not stronger or even more pleasant in humans, it has no advantage. Ignoring the analog act like the bath salt makers, it'd still require a controlled substance to make.

I would still like to see human bioassays.
 
anyone know much about the binding profile of LAMPA (lysergic acid methylpropylamine)? So I see above it's about 10 times weaker. But what about relative 5HT2 bindings? I've looked everywhere and need info before going further. Any human bioassays?
 
My mother is an obstetrician at a johns hopkins medical center, they do still use ergonovine, 200mcg is the dose, if you'd like to know. I only mention her profession as I just asked her, nice to have the MD of choice to directly answer the question and know exactly why I want to know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top