"Shed a layer of skin" while peaking on chinese needlepoint lsd?

[itsALLfake]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1129381/pdf/westjmed00307-0025.pdf

This is a description of a case where 8 people were comatosed after snorting raw LSD believing it to be cocaine. Presumably they wouldn't have done more that 50mg or so (a large line of cocaine). How likely is it really that your friend took 5 times this amount without suffering a medical emergency?

Sorry, I didn't document the weekend for you. Of course, it wasn't his first dose of the weekend. He had a couple of pyrex cleanings with his mouth after laying pages the days leading up to this last night, and I couldn't tell you if his bowels voided without control or not, as he used a colonoscopy bag, but I stand by it. He wasn't up and running around while going through it..more like rolling around, if moving at all in ant infested campgrounds, and I also wonder how good your cocaine is that you get with it being only 50mg's for your large lines. Either it's better than what can be gotten in the East coast of the states, or you just can't afford to splurge. With you being in the UK, I doubt it's better than what's available in Florida, consistently. Plus, don't you think the fact that they were expecting cocaine could've had something to do with it? I'm sorry what happens with everything psychedelic people have experience with isn't available for you on the intranet.


Rushing with my words, but if you know how to work with the chemical...in my opinion it's not matched. I think my wording ended up like that, in terms of its spiritual value, from comparison of other things available that aren't drugs. Regardless that it's my opinion that I feel LSD is the best psychedelic, obviously I'm working with it differently than others that gain higher appreciation for other things.

^^ Do you think the psycho-spiritual value of LSD exceeds that of other psychedelics? I personally think that mushrooms, or more specifically the host of substituted tryptamines that lie in the fungus, are easily equal to LSD as far as producing valuable mystical experiences, I just think they're different as far as the types of feelings they produce. Acid seems to connect me with the universe at large while mushrooms give me the utterly distinct feeling of sharing my brain case with some other form of life, something powerful, ancient, and truly alien to ordinary human experience.

Anyway I don't think value judgements need to be made on the subject, if somebody thinks that acid is more valuable on the whole than other psychedelics I think they're entitled to their opinion, but I'm just curious if I understood that part of the post correctly.

 

[Deinonychus]

Rushing with my words, but if you know how to work with the chemical...in my opinion it's not matched. I think my wording ended up like that, in terms of its spiritual value, from comparison of other things available that aren't drugs. Regardless that it's my opinion that I feel LSD is the best psychedelic, obviously I'm working with it differently than others that gain higher appreciation for other things.

That's cool, I don't think there's anything people can take issue with in personal opinions like this. What may or may not be the case for you as far as derived value from one psychedelic or another is not anything that other people can dispute, since there's no way to objectively experience another person's experiences. It would be totally awesome if there was indeed a way to transfer the data streams from all five of one person's sense to a different person entirely (I'm so down to experience lesbian sex, would be great), but there's not, so value judgements made on the basis of ones experiences are pretty much unassailable and off limits as far as debate, provided that those value judgements aren't extended to other people or presented as objective fact (like 'I find acid to be the most spiritually useful psychedelic, therefor it is the most spiritually useful psychedelic for you too, or for everyone, cause I say so', etc).

As for 'knowing how to work with it', I definitely buy the idea that there are ways to engender spiritual feelings to either a more frequent or greater/deeper extent than might otherwise occur by developing some sort of set of techniques and practicing them in such a way as to hone those techniques into the most effective tools as is possible. Would you perhaps care to elaborate on 'how you work' with acid? I'd be very interested in hearing about those techniques and perhaps attempting to utilize them during my next acid trip.

I don't however think that the reasons that you find acid to be the most spiritually useful psychedelic while others may disagree and have alternate choices for 'most spiritually useful' psychedelics can be ascribed solely to your 'working with it differently'. Instead I would focus on the different forms of subjective value that can be derived from psychedelic experiences. For example, one of the most powerful spiritual experiences I have had was on 2C-B

I'm a habitual daily-using heroin junkie, as you may well know, and during that trip I took a shower that cleansed by soul and mind, not just my body. Upon getting dried off and dressed I had the realization that everything that can be broken can be repaired. The caveat, which is not a negative thing, is that the repaired object will not be exactly the same as it was before being broken, cracks will still show perhaps, though those fractures may be fully repaired in structural terms. So applying this to my life, I can, when the time comes that I am fully motivated and dedicated to getting clean, repair all the psychological and spiritual damage that has resulted from my addiction. And in accordence with that caveat, I will not be the same person as I was before I got hooked, or the person I would be had I never been hooked at all. So though I can heal the wounds, scars may remain, but those scars aren't a bad thing because they'll remind me not to harm myself in that way again.

So this was a very spiritually powerful realization. However, it isn't spiritual in the same sense as the cosmic spirituality derived from an acid trip. And my first experience of ego loss, on a half ounce of mushrooms in a forest, was the experience of the universe dying and being reborn or better said reincarnated, hundreds millions of times per second. That was itself immensely spiritually powerful, but again in a different way from acid. And then I have also had incredibly powerful spiritual experiences on acid in the traditional sense, which you allude to.

So I personally don't think I could pick one psychedelic and tout it as the most powerful. That's not to say that it's wrong to do so if you can indeed examine your experiences and conclude that one psychedelic trumps all others for you in a spiritual sense. I just personally can't do that myself. For me, I find that there are uses and aspects of many psychedelics – but not all, 2C-I being an instance of a chemical that I find just utterly worthless and incapable of generating any meaning whatsoever – that are all equally valuable, but understanding that they hear their value in different ways. Still, I'm sure there are many, many people besides yourself who would indeed be able to pick a single psychedelic as being the most powerful for them, and doubtless many would also choose LSD.

Anyway I'm definitely interested in hearing about your metaphorical toolkit as far as 'knowing how to work with acid', should you be interested in talking on the subject!

EDIT: I guess the argument could be made that the experiences I described are not 'spiritual' in the manner of acid. That they may be powerful, and have real psychological implications, even that they could indeed have an effect on what I would describe ask my 'soul', though I don't believe in souls as separate things from my physical body, in the religious sense, preferring instead to think of it as being the parts of my conscious and unconscious mind that could be described no other way with any accuracy than to bundle them together as 'my soul' or 'my spirit', but with an understanding that this aspect of myself is still generated solely by my brain, is an integral part of my being, but possesses no supernatural aspects and will crease to exist when I die.

But anyway, leaving aside that digression about what 'my soul' is, I think trying to argue that those experiences I had that I feel we're spiritual but not in the exact manner of acid are instead not spiritual experiences but instead simply powerful psychological experiences that may have impact on my psyche or my soul is a restrictive use, and an arbitrarily picky use, of the word 'spiritual'. Those experiences sure felt spiritually powerful to me, in the sense that they touched a part of my being that is not associated with the rational or irrational reasoning performed by my mind. They touched a part of my being that is in some senses an antithesis to my conscious mind, a deep portion of my being that is generally off-limits to my conscious control, that is also the part of myself that would be touched by religion, were I religious. That sounds like a spiritual part of myself to me ears, and so I label those experiences as spiritual, while ackgnowledging that this part of myself that was touched by these experiences can – just like my conscious mind – be stimulated in a variety of ways. One of those ways is the 'cosmic and spiritually inclusive experience' that acid produces, while the ego death universe creation/destruction cycle mushroom trip and the realizations that day on 2C-B each touch that spiritual part of myself as well, in unique ways relative to eachother or to the traditionally spiritual acid experience.

 

[DrunkardsDream]

^^^ You are rude and incorrect sir. First off all the Kush I smoke comes from Arjan roscam's seeds in Amsterdam, that's how I know it is legit

Secondly in my region we are flooded with Fluff blotter and the guy I got this V from was connected with the fluff family so thats why I said that, your right it could have been another crystal...

However I eat so much fluff that when I turn to silver I notice a huge difference.

"Now theres a post out there by someone who apparently rolled with The Dead and helped lay blotter and so on "

There is no apparently about it, Chinacat is a raw ass mother fucker I wish he was here to clear all of this up for us.

Your Kush explosion theory can bite me nuts.

Chinacat is nothing but a low level LSD and drug dealer who would sell drugs to buy enough coke or heroin to stay high, and he's total trash who wrecked his body with decades of heroin and cocaine use.

As many other people here have said before the different names/types of crystal or calling certain types of LSD fluff, lavender, etc. is all just branding and marketing.

 

[itsALLfake]

Dein_ The value I put on LSD was just inclusive on its economical value, which value is what it is due to its spiritual(what is labeled easier as), recreational, and research value. The math annon put together makes it out to be $12,000...Five years ago it was more like $20,000 for a common buyer, and that was five years ago. I don't really care to know what it is today, seeing I have no need to. so we'll just go down to $15k per gram. The amount of money that can be made off this molecule is what I'm defining its value by...not really in comparison to other chemicals I don't personally care for.. if that wasn't caught by you.

It's hard to post about what spirituality is without going in circles, eh?

 

[Deinonychus]

Dein_ The value I put on LSD was just inclusive on its economical value, which value is what it is due to its spiritual(what is labeled easier as), recreational, and research value. The math annon put together makes it out to be $12,000...Five years ago it was more like $20,000 for a common buyer, and that was five years ago. I don't really care to know what it is today, seeing I have no need to. so we'll just go down to $15k per gram. The amount of money that can be made off this molecule is what I'm defining its value by...not really in comparison to other chemicals I don't personally care for.. if that wasn't caught by you.

It's hard to post about what spirituality is without going in circles, eh?

Hah, yes, we were talking past eachother, it happens. I think it's so totally hilarious how you can be having a conversation that's actually two totally different conversations depending on which participant you ask. Humans are goofy fuckin animals, no?

Without question LSD is probably one of the most financially advantageous if legally risky things to produce, if for no other reason than its obscenely awesome potency. If you have the skills and the socials connections to fix up and then move the product, I imagine it could be incredibly lucrative.

I've always wondered how much of the motivation for acid chefs is monetary and how much is wanting to 'spread the love'. I think a lot of the 'chinacat blah blah' type who ascribe only positive motives, and nothing so crude as financial interests, to acid chefs might be a bit surprised by how the equation between the two factors is actually balanced for the real people who synth.

That's about as far as I'll go with synth talk, I don't think anything particularly damning was said here, so I guess I'll try to restrain myself and keep it that way...

 

[Livinginthealps]

So you bring up a good point here. Just briefly, this is what I mean about well-constructed arguments. We may have a difference of opinion, but if you or somebody else posts questions like this I'm down for some constructive dialogue, it's just opinion posed as fact that I won't abide.

So you are sorta asking two things here. One of them is 'can a compound with low or no binding affinity have effects in the body anyway', and the other is 'can doses of a drug that are not active in and of themselves produce effects when a second drug at a fully-active dose is added into the mix'.

The first question is answered with a definite yes. A chemical with little to no binding affinity for, say, 5-HT receptors in the brain, can still produce effects if it can have affinity for receptors in the sympathomimetic nervous system, or receptors in other tissues. And the second question is yes and no. It depends on the drug. For example, TOMSO, from PIHKaL, is inactive on its own, but in combination with something like alcohol it somehow suddenly becomes active. That said the doses here are not small, in the tens of micrograms as would be the case for an impurity in dirty acid. So this is really dependent on a case by case examination of the drugs in question, but without a candidate for the contaminant in supposedly dirty acid we can't really say one way or another. I think this is actually a pretty good example. The problem though is that synergistic effects when combining these kinds of drugs are well known. We're (in my opinion) still left with the issue of the required potency for an acid blotter contaminant, which must also be somehow produced via the synthesis of the LSD itself. .

Ok, but just because we aren't aware of the contaminant that can be playing the synergistic role doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I have witnessed the effects too many times with LSD that we have bought raw as lower quality. I wish every batch through the years was GC/MS . It would make for an interesting study. I am not involved in the drugs in any illegal ways anymore. Other than eating LSD I have saved or acquire when something special is being broken down. But, I am still always in the presence of raw LSD and people who are familiar with it and these negative effects with lower quality crystals are recorded within a vast amount of these people. Not everyone I know has the same agenda. Some don't believe in spreading that "garbage" when it comes around others need to get by and will sell any quality raw they can get. These people often come back discussing how they are sitting on packs upon packs due to negative reactions. These aren't "difficult" or "bad" trips by any means. They usually result in migranes, nausea, cramping etc. When a batch of needle structured crystal comes through, you will never hear a complaint. I wonder what byproducts or impurities from the various synthesis can be present in low quality LSD.

Twice I have. If you're referring to needle shaped crystals then my earlier attack on the idea may have been incorrect, based on the assumption that you were using the definition given earlier in the thread of needlepoint being blotter dosed with a syringe. That would be marketing hype, as it would have no bearing on the amount of mics laid down. One of the times I've seen the crystal it was totally ground up into tiny microcrystalline bits, looked kinda like the microcrystalline methylone that was around before the ban. The second time it was indeed in pointy thin pieces.

Yes in the United States Needlepoint is the term for near pure LSD that takes the form of needle like crystals. Yes, most people blabbering about needlepoint or fluff haven't ever seen it in person. But, that is not to say they haven't eaten it. It is out there just as much as all the other various purities. I actually will say that extremely low purity such as dark sludgy material doesn't make an appearance as much as moderate quality to high quality LSD does. That is because in my experience there is a common knowledge between people working it that the effects brought on from low quality material becomes too much on high doses. Lot's of people close to people working it take large doses. It is not uncommon at gatherings to be drinking from a bottle with an unknown amount of LSD in it. These effects seem to be MUCH more apparent in high dosages than a few blotters.

It's highly relevant though that you do have access to proper spectroscopic measurement equipment. If you'd concentrated on the known, scientific information, my post would have been a lot different. Trying to say the human body can measure purity by GI symptoms makes my brain hurt, it's contrary to everything I know and feel about the human body and mind. So when we were all calling you out on your purity numbers, that would use been the ideal time to mention you've got access to real equipment.

Pray tell, what have the results with the equipment been? I'm curious, and do you have access to something like an NMR setup? This would be the ideal because you would have access to machinery that can actually tell people factual things about whether there's a contaminant and if so what it is.

I didn't measure approximate purity from my symptoms. When buying raw you have a very good idea on what your buying. You don't acquire it from the average tour rat hustling paper. It doesn't stay in raw form for very long. Generally, if your in the presence of raw your in the presence of someone close to the top.
As for gc/ms I have had various powders tested in the past and some high purity LSD for kicks. But, never a low quality batch of raw. Probably, because I wouldn't of bought it... I will see if I can get some low quality tested and some needlepoint tested and get a print out. That would be interesting and it is something i will look into for the future.

When we worked raw we had a very good idea on the numbers. A majority of the time we were told by our connect as we had to know how to break it down. I do not really know/feel comfortable talking about someones equipment that is not mine.

I don't like the idea of the idiot savant following a recipe much. Also, I would expect that the early pioneers in synthesis that were not part of a chemical synthesis company would have had impure starting materials. If you use garbage precursors, sure you may get brownish liquids, but my point is that anybody that is *competant* will immediately subject that brown liquid to some form of purification, hence why I dislike the idiot savant idea because they will not be competent. Even with the loss of material from several recrystallization a *real chemist* will prefer to finish with the best possible product. The level of mastery of synthetic technique necessary for making LSD pretty much ensures that the vast majority of the people who do this will know their chemistry really well.

Maybe not be a master chemist but, he certainly is respected in the community and made more high quality LSD than most people can say they have. The various accounts of lower quality lsd and negative body symptoms that arise have to be taken in to account somewhat. Especially by people that are cooking it, gobbling down massive amounts, researching it, experimenting with it in the early days of LSD usage. Most of these accounts are from high dosages of known low quality or poor synthesis lsd. When eating LSD in high dosages multiple mg++ doesn't it make sense that byproducts and impurities play a role on the overall experience. They may not be active on a single blotter but, have a drink of some lemonaide with a few mg in it then who knows...

 

[Anon0631]

When buying raw you have a very good idea on what your buying. You don't acquire it from the average tour rat hustling paper. It doesn't stay in raw form for very long. Generally, if your in the presence of raw your in the presence of someone close to the top.

When we worked raw we had a very good idea on the numbers. A majority of the time we were told by our connect as we had to know how to break it down. I do not really know/feel comfortable talking about someones equipment that is not mine.

This is exactly the information we were trying to illicit from you. You entered the experience primed. You knew what you were expecting to feel and the placebo effect combined with the powerful sensory distortions experienced on LSD did the rest.

This is effectively 'case closed' concerning all the information you have presented here to prove the 'impure LSD' theory. It's invalid because your trials weren't blind. And before you argue that you are somehow immune from placebo effects, do some reading about it (I recommend Ben Goldachre as a starting point). Placebos show positive correlations in clinical trials even when the patient is informed that they are taking a placebo. It's powerful stuff which explains centuries of successes with homeopathy and acupuncture.

I still question the itsallfake's stories of consumption of massive quantities of LSD too. I'm filing it under 'people on the internet sometimes make stuff up'.

 

[Livinginthealps]

This is exactly the information we were trying to illicit from you. You entered the experience primed. You knew what you were expecting to feel and the placebo effect combined with the powerful sensory distortions experienced on LSD did the rest.

This is effectively 'case closed' concerning all the information you have presented here to prove the 'impure LSD' theory. It's invalid because your trials weren't blind. And before you argue that you are somehow immune from placebo effects, do some reading about it (I recommend Ben Goldachre as a starting point). Placebos show positive correlations in clinical trials even when the patient is informed that they are taking a placebo. It's powerful stuff which explains centuries of successes with homeopathy and acupuncture.

I still question the itsallfake's stories of consumption of massive quantities of LSD too. I'm filing it under 'people on the internet sometimes make stuff up'.

Believe what you want. I stated I didn't feel comfortable discussing the matter of numbers and certainty. There is only so much I feel comfortable sharing. I understand you go into a trip with the mindset of getting sick, chances are you will. I have never gone into a trip with the mindset of getting sick. It does not happen often. Only a number of times in my experience. Every time for me was on a high dosage of low quality raw. (not a guess) I presented some possible scenarios of what can be happening, you ignored them. It was not addressed to you anyway... There is only so much information we can have without running a study. Hopefully we can get some testing done of a low quality batch of raw. See what potential impurities their are. From, what I have read and others have said, it does not need to be active to effect the active drug (d-lsd). You say I the rest I experienced was placebo effect. You say that with some certainty when in reality thre is a possibility you're just as "wrong" as I am. This was not a small dose so impurites, by products whatever could of potentially been in a much higher dosage. I can not discuss my experiences rather being around close friends with extensive LSD usage. They rarely know what LSD they took unless they ask... They don't care just because thye will try anything once. It is not uncommon when these batches do come through for everyone that ate it to experience the SAME EXACT body effects I describe as negative. Placebo? Possibly Is something else going on? Possibly


People on the internet sometimes like to tell stories. It's understandable but, that doesn't mean to discredit everything you hear about others experiences. Especially, just because YOU didn't experience it. I have tons of stories through my experiences involved in psychedelics and music. I am willing to bet most people on the internet wouldn't believe half them. I don't doubt people eating many of a mg as the people I know love to eat their L. They eat bottles upon bottles. It's not uncommon to be drinking from a container that has so much raw LSD in it, you come up within minutes. Acid tests are not uncommon in these communities and things like to get weird during it. Let's just say "family and friends" of the original acid tests.
I did see the post your referring to about snorting crystal at a festival. I assume wanee in florida? Anyway, I have seen people do dumb things, I would consider that one of them. But, I wouldn't put it past people. Generally, raw is not just floating around a festival. If someones working it they would of broke it down before arriving. But, I guess in my days I laid on the road before. 250 mg is alot by yourself. A drink for a few people through out the festival would be a higher dosage than most have taken. Snorting it at once would take you far away. lol Don't take price into your consideration if it happened or not. People that put in alot of work have low prices compared to the general market. But, 250 ug is waste imo. each their own