• Psychedelic Drugs Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
    PD's Best Threads Index
    Social ThreadSupport Bluelight
    Psychedelic Beginner's FAQ
  • PD Moderators: Esperighanto | JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

[LSD Subthread] The Clean vs. Dirty Acid Debate (Part 1 - Archived)

Ismene said:
righteously mellow
Click to expand...

LOLLL :D
I swear i've seen that phrase somewhere else on this forum lately, hahah. It's just as funny now I see it again.
 
i think it was the "MHRB extraction horror" thread started by FrostyMcFailure. =D

"I believe the addition of soil to lighter fuel is an ancient inca method of making your aya righteously mellow." -Ismene
 
Church said:
Obviously there is too much to disagree about here, but I'm sorry, there is definitely a degradation that occurs in LSD during storage... and anyone who's ever had vials and vials of the pure stuff knows that after months go by, the trip changes. It's not set and setting! It's actual physical effects and feelings that are there that weren't there when the vial was fresh out of the lab.

What's more is that throughout ALL of the 200 or so vials that I've gone through in my life, this is a cycle that ALWAYS happened. You get a fresh vial, its amazingly pure and clean, no ill physical effects from it, so easy to forget that you took any acid at all (as far as body feelings go). But then if that same vial happened to still be around after 6 months or so, the very same acid which still allowed me to trip, would start giving me the physical feelings that I've come to associate over the years with "bad acid" (but more accurately just "decomposing acid").

And if this were set and setting, I could write those feelings off as just that, and come back another time and it will be just like the vial is fresh, right? Then how come it NEVER works this way? In my whole entire acid-taking career, once the acid starts to decompose (I suppose that's just my theory, although Shulgin doesn't disagree with me) it stays decomposed, and the ill physical feelings are there for good. There is a definite pattern there, and anyone who's had the opportunity to go through hundreds of vials in their time should be able to see where I'm coming from.

I can't prove it, but my first-hand anecdotal experience is worth way more than the line "acid is acid." NOPE! There is pure acid, and there's acid that's not pure and causes flu-like body aches (but don't get me wrong, the trip is still there, its just affected by the decomposed drug). Whether or not the acid got this way due to normal decomp-over-time, or if it was poorly synthesized, the result is still the same.

And it gets progressively more noticeable. One time I found an old empty acid vial in my closet, that I had forgotten about. It had to have been in my closet for about a year and a half. Since I didn't have any fresh acid at the time, I figured I would cut the vial open and lick the inside of it, which I did. And let me tell you, the physical feelings I got from it were so ill-feeling, all I could do was lay on my couch the whole night watching movies. It doesn't result in a "bad trip" or anything, that's not what I'm saying. I mean mind over matter and stuff... I can always have a good time and make the best of it. I'm just saying physically it makes me feel slightly ill, where clean, fresh acid makes me feel like I didn't take a drug at all (except for that electricity taste that's always there on any amount of acid).

I'm done ranting.
Click to expand...

I def notice a prominent degradation of liquid acid after a couple months or so. This can usually be postponed slightly by storing in the freezer. What is interesting is that I really don't notcie this as much with paper. Paper seems to stay "good" for quite a bit longer than liquid.
 
Nope. Doesn't exist.

If I'm not mistaken both L-LSD and D-LSD are constantly interconverting between LSD and iso-LSD in the presence of a base. iso-LSD isn't necessarily an adulterant, as it can be isomerized back into LSD with a base. Perhaps the alkalinity of your stomach when you take the acid is a factor?

Secondly, L-LSD. Overall, LSD is a very difficult chemical to manufacture. Because of this, it isn't attempted by many, and I would imagine a very slim number of those that try end up with *any* sort of psychoactive resultant. It takes a good deal of equipment and training, plus with the current legality of LSD and sentencing guidelines, even fewer people would want to risk it. Who are you left with? Highly intelligent, resourceful people that are dedicated to manufacturing LSD. Someone with this sort of knowledge and resources would probably know to use d-tartaric acid to extract the D-LSD.

This isn't meth cooked up by some 16 year old in some abandoned pick up truck, there aren't all kinds of ridiculous adulterants in it.

And as a side note, I read a report the other day about LSD testing in the 60s and 70s. Pretty much all of the samples were relatively pure, however there was a strong relationship between the dose of LSD on the blotter, and peoples' likelihood of thinking that it has something like strychnine on it. The more LSD you put on a blotter, the more likely people will take it, and get fucked up enough to convince themself that they have somehow taken another drug.

I think the obvious truth about this debate is that you are dealing with a drug with about the steepest dose/response curve you can imagine, paired with a completely unstandardized and random dosing scheme.

For those of you that are convinced that you can tell the difference between 400ug and 300ug of LSD, I would kindly ask you to take a picture of the LSD crystals on your microgram scale. If you don't have access to a microgram scale, and pure, crystalline LSD directly from the chemist, you do not know exactly how much you are taking. Ever.
 
i and a few other members of this board who have chewed and swallowed enough sheets to note such things, believe that the particular cook's karma and spiritual intent contribute significantly to the morphogenics and overall quality of both the catalyst and the experience.
Click to expand...

Well the LSD & the pranksters had originally was made by a chemisdt for the CIA/NSA/whatever spooks were responsible for MKULTRA and it didn't turn out bad for them. On this topic, you could put me down as a 'doubting Thomas' to put it mildly


I think the obvious truth about this debate is that you are dealing with a drug with about the steepest dose/response curve you can imagine
Click to expand...

The dose response curve with LSD seems almost linear when compared to some of the phenethylamines/amphetamines where a 20% increase can have a profound difference in intensity of effect (eg 16 vs 20mg of 2C-E)


If you don't have access to a microgram scale...
Click to expand...

A milligram scale and volumetric standard pipettes do just as well as dilution is a sound way of determining microgram doses, you don't need an Ohaus microgram scale (although the bit abouy xtalline LSD from the source holds true)
 
fastandbulbous said:
The dose response curve with LSD seems almost linear when compared to some of the phenethylamines/amphetamines where a 20% increase can have a profound difference in intensity of effect (eg 16 vs 20mg of 2C-E)
Click to expand...


It only seems linear because we think about it in terms of micrograms, in reality, the amount of LSD you can lose or gain through making a mistake while dosing can, and will, dramatically affect the trip. ie In DOC terms, 2 to 2.5mg is not that big of a jump, but for LSD, the difference between 500ug and 1mg is huge.
 
Church said:
:(?
Click to expand...

Dude, no, I believe you are correct. We know that some LSD is pure and some is contaminated/not pure. We know that sloppily synthesized LSD produces a different effect than pure LSD. That means that LSD differs from batch to batch in effect. We also know that improperly stored LSD degrades into d-iso-LSD and lumi-LSD, whose singular effects are null.

However, after lurking BL for a couple years, and then finally registering, and then posting a fair bit and lurking a shitload more (along with visiting many other forums which had a "drugs" section over the past 5 years, absorbing everything possible), it seems to be the general trend that the older the acid is, the less it will feel like pure LSD. This is disregarding, of course, the also numerous number of times I have read of people without direct experience speculating about said trend.

Church's post is a great anecdote. After going through 200 vials (even if that was 200 hits from one vial), I'm sure you would experience a few specific repeating self-placebo'd effects. That is almost guaranteed. However, I think that Church did not just imagine this, but that what he is saying is that after looking back on his 200 vials, he recognized a general trend that his trips were more unpleasant physically as time went on, relative to each vial. After 200 vials, or even hits/trips, I bet that you get a pretty good handle on the whole thing.

:D
 
LSD is LSD, and the amount of impurities present in a given sample of LSD varies. There is no stronger, weaker, "good" or "bad" LSD. LSD that has degraded will not produce "bad" effects; it will produce weaker ones or none at all due to LSD molecules degrading into one of the 3 other stereoisomers of LSD which aren't psychoactive. There aren't enough impurities present in LSD for those impurities to have a perceivable effect on the experience, I'd have to say that psychosomatic reactions would be much more influential to a trip than any impurities.

So instead of "good" or "bad" acid, think "more" or "less" acid...

Any unpleasant reactions from certain batches of LSD are due to set, setting, and the highly subjective nature of the LSD experience.

Or you could have DOx compunds which may cause unpleasant reactions...

So why is this thread still open? =D
 
All you people saying categorically that there are NO molecular substances related to LSD that have any effects, are just repeating urban legent bullshit "Its all real pure LSD and anything else is impossible" are talking BS out your asses. You are just making crap up to sound superior, and you have NO idea WTF you are talking about. Why should the LSD molecule be THE ONLY ONE IN THE UNIVERSE that has active effects at tiny doses? That claim makes NO sense, has ZERO basis in science and logic. You are just talking out your asses to sound superior. Go fly a kite.
 
DwayneHoover said:
All you people saying categorically that there are NO molecular substances related to LSD that have any effects, are just repeating urban legent bullshit "Its all real pure LSD and anything else is impossible" are talking BS out your asses. You are just making crap up to sound superior, and you have NO idea WTF you are talking about. Why should the LSD molecule be THE ONLY ONE IN THE UNIVERSE that has active effects at tiny doses? That claim makes NO sense, has ZERO basis in science and logic. You are just talking out your asses to sound superior. Go fly a kite.
Click to expand...

This was sure an articulate and scientific post. 8)
 
LSD-25 is LSD-25 just like distilled H2O is distilled H2O and it doesn't matter if the original source of the water was a mountain stream or a mud puddle in my back yard. With that being said I will go further and say that there are variations of the lysergic acid molecule that are active at microgram levels and I'm not refering to isomers of LSD-25. ALD-52 is well known and is the first one that comes to mind and there other variations like ETH-LAD which is considered to be even more active on a microgram level than LSD-25. These substances have their own distinct molecular structure and they have somewhat different effects on human physiology than LSD-25. After many years of experience I know that there are distinct differences in between different types of "acid" and it's not just related to set and setting. Some is speedy with back aches and gives you the shits, some is more mellow with less body load, some is hillarious and will make you laugh until you pull a muscle in your gut and you will still keep laughing(I suspect that this type is the real LSD-25 but that's just an educated guess), some is more visual. But unless someone has access to analytical equipment and is able to compare chromatograph results with a known sample of LSD-25 there is no real way of knowing for sure what "acid" you have. Even if the chemist is a close friend you can't be 100% sure because chemist are changing things up and trying different processes all the time. The average person that drops "acid" does not have any experience with chemistry and wouldn't understand the difference between between the different variations if you spelled it out for them and included pictures. People that manufacture and distribute "acid" aren't going to tell people that the product is actually ALD or LAD because that would only confuse people and be bad for the bottom line. People want "acid" and by god the manufacturers are going to make sure that they get "acid" but there is no guarantee that the "acid" is LSD-25. This has been the situation since Owsley produced Orange Sunshine, which people are still debating to this day wether it was LSD or ALD, and as long as the manufacture of "acid" is being done by clandestine chemist the situation will remain the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top