LSD first time, tips?

[Rita Prell]

Indeed, Everyday Above six feet under is a good day

It's all good Rita, have a wonderful day !

Perhaps we'll cross paths, here in, again

Rita Prell

 

[Rita Prell]

Welp...

that is a very interesting comment, in this chain, of loosely connected comments, questions, statements etc.

@White_Rose
good reminder, the harm reduction underpinnings are what makes this place invaluable.

Hiding behind the big old White dog...

 

[HJ420]

So I have 5 blotters, apparently 110 ug each.

I would start with 2 of those tabs, but that's just me. It's all about how intense of an experience you want. The first time I took LSD it was that dose and I lost all concept of reality and was vibing with my friends on a whole new level I had never felt before. The music we were listening to became a part of the experience in my friends room and the visuals were moving to the beat of the songs. It was very intense in all aspects though, I felt like I was breathing extremely heavily and my brain felt scattered, almost to the point where I couldn't decide what I wanted to do, but my entire body and everything I was looking at was melting. So yeah, please be careful

 

[House_Wren]

Caution with strong drugs like this

I have never had any psychedelic experience before and want to know what to expect basically...

January 11-12, 1980 was the date of my first LSD trip, in Houston, Texas. I was in the Denny’s when I put the blotter square on my tongue. 40 minutes later I was at the apartment door on Kirby, and the outside light looked strange, brighter, colors scintillating. 30 minutes after that, the cigarette butts in the ashtray were wiggling like beetle grubs.

For first-timers, the first and best advice is don’t. LSD is a very powerful drug. Less than one-quarter of a milligram will rocket you into a fourth dimension for a good five or six hours, and it might take two or three days to fully descend to normal, although the hallucinatory trip itself ends before eight hours have passed, to give way to an afterglow or “hangover” effect.

If you do it anyway, have an experienced guide. Later, when acid becomes familiar to you, you’ll be able to skip this step. But the first time, expect a wild ride.

Be aware of the possibility of bad acid that will make you sick—and tripping your eyeballs off while you’re in that state of utter disorientation. If you’re over 50 this advice gains importance, as your body is less able to handle a jolt.

Enjoy. As the actual dose contained in your blotters cannot be ascertained without trying it, begin with one. If it does not do much, a second may be dropped. With acid, the smallest effective dose should be used.:D

 

[Clocktower]

You can always try taking more your second time if you feel like you didn't take enough the first time. If it's your first time taking LSD, you should just take one blotter. Conversation over.

 

[Incunabula]

You can always try taking more your second time if you feel like you didn't take enough the first time. If it's your first time taking LSD, you should just take one blotter. Conversation over.

Quoted for truth.

You can always take more, but never less. Drugs aren't toys, so never be cavalier about taking them. End of topic.

... so, what are we now, the Partnership for a Drug-Free America?

No, this site is dedicated to harm reduction. Read op on what that means, before you post again. Thank you.

 

[forestman4]

Thank you guys for all the tips. And yes, 5 hits seem like a retarded amount to take for someone with no experience of psych. I am waiting since I want to be in a good mindset and have a perfect setting before I take the lsd..

 

[Rita Prell]

Get over yourself. I know what the term means. We are discussing acid...

Quoted for truth.

You can always take more, but never less. Drugs aren't toys, so never be cavalier about taking them. End of topic.


No, this site is dedicated to harm reduction. Read op on what that means, before you post again. Thank you.

...not poison.

Mind you, my initial post was regarding dosage, only. I had suggested that this was only assuming that everything else, set, setting, sitter, etcetera, was a crystalline perfection.

I take acid very, very seriously.

I responded to words like "terrible" and "dangerous" being bandied about.

THAT is what makes us seem like 5-O.

Rita Prell

 

[Rita Prell]

Nobody says retarded, anymore, Forest. I have a special needs child.

Thank you guys for all the tips. And yes, 5 hits seem like a retarded amount to take for someone with no experience of psych. I am waiting since I want to be in a good mindset and have a perfect setting before I take the lsd..

Well we're all so busy, I taking offense, maybe that bit of political correctness would do you well.

Many have been introduced to LSD, using even more.

To each, his or her own.

I hope you have a safe and revealing trip.

Rita Prell

 

[pupnik]

taking offense and giving it: you called me a nanny, and claimed I am hiding behind a white dog. - that's twice in one thread. (WTF)
Stop being a cranky old timer with bragging rights from the 60's.
I have news for you
there are no bragging rights when you are on psychedelics.
You should lose that bravado, it is not attractive, or helpful.

 

[Vastness]

Mind you, my initial post was regarding dosage, only. I had suggested that this was only assuming that everything else, set, setting, sitter, etcetera, was a crystalline perfection.

I take acid very, very seriously.

I responded to words like "terrible" and "dangerous" being bandied about.

THAT is what makes us seem like 5-O.

Hi Rita, I was the one who initially bandied about those words, terrible, dangerous, irresponsible, which I stand by and I will explain why. You say that you assume everything else was perfect, but you did not make this clear, and anyway this is just not something that you can reasonably assume, ever, because even if you were going to trip-sit the poster yourself, for someone who has never done psychedelics before, there are hidden dangers that you cannot reasonably plan for or predict... in that specific individual's brain chemistry, any underlying psychiatric issues or any genetic predisposition to such. Because of these things, even if the planning and the setting is absolutely perfect, it is STILL possible for someone to have a Very Bad Time on even a particularly low dose of any psychedelic.

Even if the planning is perfect, it is still NOT GUARANTEED that they will have a good time, or even a bad time that doesn't leave them with lasting psychological scars. For these reasons, I would say that even if you were trip sitting someone yourself it is still irresponsible and dangerous to give them 550mcg of LSD for their first time, and I'm really baffled that you would even try to argue this point... Added to the fact that you obviously are not trip sitting the person yourself, they are a total stranger over the internet, and despite what you have said since you offered no other advice except to take 5 hits... well, I think "terrible" is quite an apt description for that advice.

You say you take acid seriously, and yet you speak of it like the dangers of bad trips are overblown and everyone should just chill out and take massive doses without crying about it... I would venture to suggest that this is likely something to do with your personal beliefs that LSD is some kind of god-given gift to man rather than a fortuitously synthesised and unusual chemical with some strange effects on the human brain. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs of course and there is no reason LSD can't be both, BUT it is a mistake to be so flippant about the dangers because as I've already stated bad reactions DO happen that sometimes just could not have been predicted.

To be honest I find it offensive myself that you would even try to suggest that some caution when approaching powerful mind-altering drugs is in any way analogous to the sustained and monumentally harmful misinformation campaigns waged on these substances by government agencies in the name of prohibition... I would say that in fact your apparent unwillingness to accept that there are quite real dangers when it comes to high dose psychedelics, quite apart from any actual chemical toxicity (or "poisonous" tendencies, in your words), is just as bad as the prohibitionist myths which say the opposite. Your current position does nothing good for the psychedelic or drug-taking community at large, and I hope that you can see the reason in what I am saying and moderate any future advice regarding dosing for psychedelic-naive individuals accordingly.

 

[Incunabula]

.....and that's not even considering the fact, that what he has, might not even be LSD at all. It could be an NBOMe or a DOx. In that case, the difference between taking 1 and 5 blotters is a matter of life and death. The blotters might also be unevenly laid. And how unlikely it may seem, they might also generally contain more than the purported 100 ug.

This is just proof, I guess, that taking a lot of psychedelics doesn't make you a better or more wise person.

 

[Rita Prell]

Dear Pup - towards a cessation of hostilities...

taking offense and giving it: you called me a nanny, and claimed I am hiding behind a white dog. - that's twice in one thread. (WTF)
Stop being a cranky old timer with bragging rights from the 60's.
I have news for you
there are no bragging rights when you are on psychedelics.
You should lose that bravado, it is not attractive, or helpful.

Dear Pup,

I’m sorry that I snapped back at you, with that yappity-yapdog reference.

Others had posted, using words like “terrible,”“irresponsible,” and “dangerous,” so, I’d felt a bit beleaguered. I hope youwill accept my apology.

I was born in the ‘60’s, so, I was a child, then; I don’tfeel I have street cred, for that decade. Though I’ve been to Dead concerts, amacquainted with some in the new movement towards legitimatization, and evencommunicated, when they were alive, with Ken Kesey and Owsley (it was in morerecent years and only out of my personal interest in their retrospection, somany years after what decade was clearly a mixed blessing), none of that makesa hill of beans of difference to me or anyone. There was as much sham anddisintegration in the ‘60’s as there was progress, in my opinion, with – andI’ll address this, in a moment – the falling away from the church being themost detrimental to society..

You might consider me old (though almost no one who meets mein person accurately guesses my age), but cranky I am not, besides which,“cranky, old” is a cliché, and I’m anything but, with the possible exceptionthat brilliant people are often not equally emotionally aware, which mayexplain our conflict.

The guy I mentioned, Timothy Leary, while an acolyte of LSD,may not have been the best example of caution, and his record was anything butspotless, but, with over 40,000 studies and close to 25,000,000 Americanshaving taken LSD, the Frank Olson and Diane Linkletter incidents – thankfully –are quite rare (with circumstances surrounding the former being shielded fromtransparency). With Dr. David Nutt, I agree that LSD is one of the safest drugson the planet, with no proven LD 50/50, and all but a very few (Syd Barrett,for instance, seemed to have a disposition, before he ever dosed, and,reportedly, he dosed – and, like Frank Olson – was dosed without his knowledge,again and again) having more than transitory psychological disfunction, as aresult, with those who are most at risk having generally a known condition,such as schizophrenia, a personality disorder, such a borderline, or somefamily history of mental illness.

I respond to you, at some length, because I’m new to this forum and wish to make friends, rather than rub people the wrong way, even if it’s what I might think of as the right reasons, if that’s even possible.

As a conservative Christian, I think that the taking of LSDis for spiritual purposes, and, in my narrow view, though I am into worldreligions to a fairly advanced academic level, in praise and worship of TheEternal One, The Messiah, The Lord Jesus Christ..

Psychologist Dr. Allan Y. Cohen is quoted by James Douglasin his 2006 Resistance and Contemplation: The Way of Liberation ashaving said, “If I stick you in a church and give you 500 micrograms of LSD, Iwill guarantee you a religious experience,” while 40 years earlier, in 1967,Stafford and Golightly, in TheProblem-Solving Psychedelic, wrote “300 to 600 mcg. will produce cosmic and mysticalexperience, and above 600 mcg. the LSD field shifts into what are often called "cellular"or "molecular" realities. Because the dosage changes the type ofexperience, the concept of "over-dosing" in the narcotic sense is notapplicable and is in-accurate.”

I realize I’m in a severe minority in having both an appreciation for LSD asmeans of religious experience and a firm and evangelical conservative Christianviewpoint, but, t hat’s the perspective from which I come.

Rita

 

[Rita Prell]

Dear Vastness - towards our agreeing to disagree

Hi Rita, I was the one who initially bandied about those words, terrible, dangerous, irresponsible, which I stand by and I will explain why. You say that you assume everything else was perfect, but you did not make this clear, and anyway this is just not something that you can reasonably assume, ever, because even if you were going to trip-sit the poster yourself, for someone who has never done psychedelics before, there are hidden dangers that you cannot reasonably plan for or predict... in that specific individual's brain chemistry, any underlying psychiatric issues or any genetic predisposition to such. Because of these things, even if the planning and the setting is absolutely perfect, it is STILL possible for someone to have a Very Bad Time on even a particularly low dose of any psychedelic.

Even if the planning is perfect, it is still NOT GUARANTEED that they will have a good time, or even a bad time that doesn't leave them with lasting psychological scars. For these reasons, I would say that even if you were trip sitting someone yourself it is still irresponsible and dangerous to give them 550mcg of LSD for their first time, and I'm really baffled that you would even try to argue this point... Added to the fact that you obviously are not trip sitting the person yourself, they are a total stranger over the internet, and despite what you have said since you offered no other advice except to take 5 hits... well, I think "terrible" is quite an apt description for that advice.

You say you take acid seriously, and yet you speak of it like the dangers of bad trips are overblown and everyone should just chill out and take massive doses without crying about it... I would venture to suggest that this is likely something to do with your personal beliefs that LSD is some kind of god-given gift to man rather than a fortuitously synthesised and unusual chemical with some strange effects on the human brain. Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs of course and there is no reason LSD can't be both, BUT it is a mistake to be so flippant about the dangers because as I've already stated bad reactions DO happen that sometimes just could not have been predicted.

To be honest I find it offensive myself that you would even try to suggest that some caution when approaching powerful mind-altering drugs is in any way analogous to the sustained and monumentally harmful misinformation campaigns waged on these substances by government agencies in the name of prohibition... I would say that in fact your apparent unwillingness to accept that there are quite real dangers when it comes to high dose psychedelics, quite apart from any actual chemical toxicity (or "poisonous" tendencies, in your words), is just as bad as the prohibitionist myths which say the opposite. Your current position does nothing good for the psychedelic or drug-taking community at large, and I hope that you can see the reason in what I am saying and moderate any future advice regarding dosing for psychedelic-naive individuals accordingly.

Dear Vast,

I covered the major objection you raise in referring to my advice as specific to the dose, solely,with all else being of crystalline perfection - so that is meant to have appliedto substance, dosage, etc. I did write as much.

The rest, in my opinion, is handwringing because, of course, there’s uncertainty, but, as weknow, LSD is a remarkably safe drug, overall, with suicides being exceedingly rare (and, to my read, have tended to occur in less-than-controlled circumstances, i.e., way less than “perfect”) and long-term psychological damage being quite extremely the exception and nearly unknown when all is quintessentially perfect as far as the context in which the drug is taken, including being bona fide LSD of exacting dosage, with the person taking it of an exquisite level of preparedness and a fully-informed consent.

Inasmuch as there are no guarantees, in life, it’s a banality to assert that there is no guaranteed good time, when using LSD. Still,I didn’t suggest throwing caution to the wind, which would be found in the preparation.

I’m of the opinion that God somehow chose to deliver LSD to our planet, for His glory. Some people even draw the synchronicity between the first LSD trip and firstuse of atomic weapons.

I don’t know about the latter, but, I’m with The Grateful Dead lyric – from “Box of Rain” –wherein they sang, “I don’t know who put it, there. Believe it, if you need it,and heed it, if you dare.”

In clinical settings, it’s been documented that dosages of 1,200, 1,500, and over-2000 have been used.

While those were closely supervised, most of the nearly 25,000,000 people in the United Stateswho have ever taken LSD were not.

While prediction of lightning strikes is also difficult, I suggest a rarity beyond rare, for real, unsolvable problems that don’t dissipate, but with reflection, soul-searching, and time. Syd Barrett is a famous example, who died in an asylum, but, published report has his mental landscape having been long disturbed and his dosing anything but in a constrained environment.

While not everyone is out for a religious experience, that’s the perspective from which I arrive at my suggestions.

 

[pupnik]

by referring to god's delivery system, you are accessing a part of the web I really can't argue with

 

[Rita Prell]

I refer you to my response to Vast, above.

.....and that's not even considering the fact, that what he has, might not even be LSD at all. It could be an NBOMe or a DOx. In that case, the difference between taking 1 and 5 blotters is a matter of life and death. The blotters might also be unevenly laid. And how unlikely it may seem, they might also generally contain more than the purported 100 ug.

This is just proof, I guess, that taking a lot of psychedelics doesn't make you a better or more wise person.

I've only just noticed that below one's username reads how many posts have been made under that username since what time of registration on this site.

Consider how much time you must've spent in making those-nearly-2,000 posts, since 2010, to what end, and how many of those were snarky.

I wonder if you consider a smart use of time the effort to appear, to people whom you will, most likely, never meet nor have any other discourse, witty, informed, intelligent, or wise.

Interesting, too, that you would choose a Latin neuter username, for which, in your case, must come from having no reproductive organs.

 

[Rita Prell]

Indeed. Thanks for your response, Pup. I appreciate the sense of humor.

by referring to god's delivery system, you are accessing a part of the web I really can't argue with

St. Thomas Aquinas had his "proofs" of the existence of God, but, I never bought into any such. I hold that there's no proof of anything supernatural, at all. When I read David Hume, of those who we now label to have been the British Radical Empiricists, when first in college, I considered myself to be that contradiction in terms, a Christian Radical Empiricist.

I certainly can't explain my feelings that God provided LSD to his creations, on purpose, any more than I can fathom the incredible odds against any of us being as advanced a life form as slime molds, much less internet-using sophisticates.

It's a pleasure to make your acquaintance, herein.

Rita

 

[HJ420]

Everyone who comes across this thread should be extremely mindful and careful with LSD. You are making connections between neurons in your brain that have previously never communicated. Don't get too lost up in the history of the drug itself or it's relation to society. It does you no good. People come and go, but the substance doesn't change.

 

[Rita Prell]

It's good, sound advice, cogently delivered, "H." I don't think that anyone of us...

Everyone who comes across this thread should be extremely mindful and careful with LSD. You are making connections between neurons in your brain that have previously never communicated. Don't get too lost up in the history of the drug itself or it's relation to society. It does you no good. People come and go, but the substance doesn't change.

...could disagree...

- R.P.

 

[Incunabula]

Oh, Rita. You litteraly been here 5 minutes, and look how many friends you already made, with your annoying posts. I'm just going to put you on ignore now. Good bye. I sure don't hope you'll be the cause of any ones death, with your horrible advice.