Natural vs. Synthetic trips (implications)

[arthunter888]

After reading tons of trip reports on a wide variety of both natural (found in nature) and synthetic (only exist as a product of humans) hallucinogens, it seems that there is a stark fundamental difference:

Trips resulting from natural hallucinogens are MUCH more likely to produce the experience/sensing of contact/communication with conscious entities than synthetic ones. The general trend is that one experiences an overwhelming and unmistakable presence of conscious being(s) (souls, spirits, invisible, voices, etc.); sometimes these presences are highly visible or invisible, some nice, some malignant, some communicate and/or teach, but in all cases the user is convinced that some type of 'other' is present.

Since I very rarely read of this type of conscious presence in synthetic trip-reports, I'm inclined that nature has some sort of conscious intent towards people through certain chemicals it creates.

[Clarification of Logic: I am NOT saying that ALL natural hallucinogens produce entity contact. I am saying that of the substances that DO consistently produce entity contact (at sufficient doses), most are natural.]

There can be many implications drawn from this trend. I would like to here your opinions/speculations about what this implies, and what it means to you. If you disagree, please elaborate why.

 

[Feste]

I think it's more just an effect from people who want a spiritual trip are more likely yo go after drugs they see as spiritual/tribal/medicinal/traditional, so ayauhsca, mushrooms or mescaline are obvious choices.

The obvious stand outs from that are DPT, ketamine & LSD.

 

[Roger&Me]

How is the LSD synthesized by a man any less natural than the DMT synthesized by a mimosa plant?

 

[any major dude]

^good points
also, the images of plant psychedelics are quite iconic, and the mental image of the psychoactive containing plant may have some bearing on the user's experience. Shrooms, cacti, vines, etc are much more striking images than tiny piles of white powder & thus much more likely to stick with the user throughout the experience.

Additionally, entity contact through pharmahuasca isn't terribly uncommon & my most recent trip with a strong spiritual component was on 4-AcO-DMT/

and lastly entity contact seems almost exclusive to dmt & its close structural variants. Since dmt is extremely common in nature it would make sense that these substances would induce entity contact. As to whether nature is trying to communicate with humans by producing dmt, well i don't really know of a way to go about testing that, but i will concede the possibility.

 

[moe.ron]

and lastly entity contact seems almost exclusive to dmt & its close structural variants. Since dmt is extremely common in nature it would make sense that these substances would induce entity contact. As to whether nature is trying to communicate with humans by producing dmt, well i don't really know of a way to go about testing that, but i will concede the possibility.

I think about this a lot, and I never get any closure to determining what I really believe about whats going on. I say to myself whats more likely: that I got very high on mushrooms and had a conversation with my own mind, which due to the extreme disruption of the way my mind normally works, appeared to be myself communicating with an outside entity, or: that I ingested mushrooms and proceeded to talk to them/gaia/"plant spirit"/god/entities/whatever you want to call them. Well to be honest, I'm not sure either way. I honestly don't know how some one can be. I mean we know that plants communicate with each other through chemical reactions, so is it the most impossible thing that these naturally produced tryptamines that so many living things produce some how play a role in some kind of non-verbal communication.

Let me be clear I am not pushing any of this as even an idea to take seriously, just that I am saying there is so much more going on in a *true* psychedelic experience, that we, or at least I, can never even grasp a sliver of certainty of whats really going on. Honestly I feel thats the way it should be. To try to describe it with our own interpretations of "synthetic vs natural" or "chemical reactions in the brain vs. communicating with the universe" probably just muddies the experience then bring us any closure to understanding it.

 

[caseface99]

I agree with the first post, its most likely because of the intents people have when choosing which drug to trip on.

not to mention a search of google came up with various reports of entity contact from LSD.

 

[Ralt]

I find the entire synthetic vs natural argument to be tired and old. Everything is natural, otherwise it would not exist. Synthetic is a useless term, man-made is a bit better, but most people can't even be convinced that man is natural, so it still loses true meaning.

 

[arthunter888]

Thanks all for the input.

I think it's more just an effect from people who want a spiritual trip are more likely yo go after drugs they see as spiritual/tribal/medicinal/traditional, so ayauhsca, mushrooms or mescaline are obvious choices.

The obvious stand outs from that are DPT, ketamine & LSD.

I knew someone would say that the entity contact is due to one's expectations about natural plants. I have to disagree. I know several people who tripped when they knew nothing about psychedelics, and on the high dose of shrooms most felt a presence at points, but did not feel presences on high dose LSD.

How is the LSD synthesized by a man any less natural than the DMT synthesized by a mimosa plant?

LSD is not found in nature, the ergot alkaloid must be chemically manipulated in a laboratory to yield LSD. DMT is found in nature.

Additionally, entity contact through pharmahuasca isn't terribly uncommon & my most recent trip with a strong spiritual component was on 4-AcO-DMT.
and lastly entity contact seems almost exclusive to dmt & its close structural variants.

Pharmahuasca contains DMT AFAIK. Well any psychedelic can be 'spiritual', but did you have entity contact on the 4-Aco-DMT? Even if you did, no surprise as it's metabolized into 4-HO-DMT, also a natural chemical. Therefore both are N/A.

I disagree that entity contact is almost exclusive to DMT and variants. I read about entity contact all the time in trips with Psilocybin and Mescaline so long as dose is sufficient, and especially Salvia.

 

[Feste]

Someone said lsd is as natural as honey, which I thought was quite nice.

 

[Ralt]

LSD is not found in nature, the ergot alkaloid must be chemically manipulated in a laboratory to yield LSD. DMT is found in nature.

Man is found in nature. Man's laboratories are found in nature, LSD is every now and then found, inside of these natural laboratories, naturally produced, from natural man.

DMT isn't just shit out magically, it's like how Roger&Me said

How is the LSD synthesized by a man any less natural than the DMT synthesized by a mimosa plant?

 

[demon66]

some chemicals that were thought to be only synthetic have later been found in nature.

Methamphetamine is a prime example. Look it up.

 

[Feste]

AFAIK the methamphetamine thing was never confirmed.

 

[phenethylo J]

^Maybe not methamphetamine but there are certain types of amphetamines found in nature.




It doesn't really matter if a psychedelic is natural or synthetic; how it effects your brain depends on its structure.
It anoys me when people claim that natural automaticly means a better more meaningfull trip. The two trips that I have had the most significant revalations on are mda and 2c-b; both of which are synthetic.

 

[nopipesdfw]

Dxm??

some chemicals that were thought to be only synthetic have later been found in nature.

Methamphetamine is a prime example. Look it up.

I suspect the universe and possible other similar instances have already smashed together in the right spots for just about all of the drugs we know to be out there somewhere... I wouldn't call any molecule a human invention in the same sense as most other inventions. (Albeit whether or not a molecule is present on Earth to consume is a pretty important factor in tripping)

What's "natural"? Everything comes from this planet doesn't it? Wouldn't that mean everything is "natural"? I don't know....i'm high as fuck.

What is considered natural is literally what was here when we got here.

Who exactly is we? I believe that life forms as a progression in any and every continuum of existence, people just like to "this or that" to a point of comfortableness.

 

[sublimestyle420]

What's "natural"? Everything comes from this planet doesn't it? Wouldn't that mean everything is "natural"? I don't know....i'm high as fuck.

 

[any major dude]

I knew someone would say that the entity contact is due to one's expectations about natural plants. I have to disagree. I know several people who tripped when they knew nothing about psychedelics, and on the high dose of shrooms most felt a presence at points, but did not feel presences on high dose LSD.

I know a guy that has smoked an awful lot of DMT and never had entity contact. Furthermore, he is very open to these types of ideas, has read a lot of McKenna, etc. Individual accounts can't really be extrapolated onto the experience of others.

Pharmahuasca contains DMT AFAIK. Well any psychedelic can be 'spiritual', but did you have entity contact on the 4-Aco-DMT? Even if you did, no surprise as it's metabolized into 4-HO-DMT, also a natural chemical. Therefore both are N/A.

I disagree that entity contact is almost exclusive to DMT and variants. I read about entity contact all the time in trips with Psilocybin and Mescaline so long as dose is sufficient, and especially Salvia.

Well psilocybin is a DMT variant, 4-PO-DMT, and instances with mescaline etc are why i said almost exclusive. Feeling a presence or having actual interaction with perceived entities is far more frequent with DMT et al than with phenethylamines, ergolines or some of your more exotic tryptamines. I'm certainly not saying it doesn't happen, just not nearly as frequently, reliably or repeatably.

As for pharmahuasca I should've been more specific. Its really a loose term that can mean any number of MAOI+tryptamine combos. anything from 2c-t-7 & DPT to moclobemide & DMT to Syrian Rue & 4-AcO-DMT. For the sake of this discussion i was referring to the non-DMT containing admixtures. And in regards to the metabolism of 4-AcO-DMT, it is far from completely understood. There's much speculation that it is at least partially metabolised into psilocin, but nothing definitive. And lastly, "classical psychedelic's" effects are in part (thought to be/likely)a result of modulating arachidonic acid & phospholipase (either C or A2, can't remember at the moment ) levels per their interaction with 5-HT2a receptors. DMT & its close relatives seem to do this in such a way that a presence is felt quite frequently, with others, infrequently. So it seems to me more a question of structure activity relationships than natural vs synthetic. The latter, IMO, is a false distinction anyway.

some chemicals that were thought to be only synthetic have later been found in nature.

Methamphetamine is a prime example. Look it up.

So is DMT, it was synthesized in the 30s, IIRC & not found in nature til the 50s. Who knows what else is out there.

AFAIK the methamphetamine thing was never confirmed.

There was one study, but I don't think anyone has tried to replicate its results. It's mentioned in an ask Dr. Shulgin post from a few years ago, couldn't find an online copy of the paper, seems like i saw one a while back though.

http://www.cognitiveliberty.org/shulgin/adsarchive/acacia.htm

What's "natural"? Everything comes from this planet doesn't it? Wouldn't that mean everything is "natural"? I don't know....i'm high as fuck.

yes. this is the stuff of many pointless essays

 

[Roger&Me]

LSD is not found in nature, the ergot alkaloid must be chemically manipulated in a laboratory to yield LSD. DMT is found in nature

Ugh, you're missing my point. The laboratory is a creation of man, and man is a creation of nature. The distinction between synthetic and "natural" is fallacious. See: appeal to nature fallacy.

 

[Leftley]

How is the LSD synthesized by a man any less natural than the DMT synthesized by a mimosa plant?

Seriously?

 

[bluelightdotcom]

I think it's just a coincidence that they have different effects. I've spent mushroom trips communicating with trees and opossums, and thinking that inanimate objects have souls. I spend most my LSD trips doing things like staring at a trail of ants and pondering my own insignificance in the universe. Different psychedelics produce trips with different characteristics, where the psychedelics came from is irrelevant. Also I think it is kind of arrogant for humans to disconnect themselves from nature, we are just apes after all.

 

[Roger&Me]

Seriously?

Seriously. A chemical is a chemical, ie a certain conformation of matter-- there is no distinction between if it was made inside of a laboratory or made inside of a plant.