Subjective effects of psychoactive substances and their respective chemical compositions?

[ShulginsReincarnation]

So, I recollect seeing on Reddit a long time ago someone going on about how a methyl group on tryptamines is what seems to bring about the subjective effect of speaking with God/spiritual experiences. I also was listening to something published by Cayman Chemical earlier on this morning that stated (the obvious) that Methoxy groups at the 4 and 5 positions of tryptamines makes tryptamines more potent. So, obviously, as with all things in the universe: there is an equation that is able to be followed to determine what subjective effects a psychedelic tryptamine will possess prior to consumption.

And, if we think about it, this type of logic is how fentanyl was invented right? Well, yes, yes it is. That was a rhetorical question. Fentanyl came about when Janssen hypothesized that the piperidine ring found in both morphine and later meperidine was the cause of the analgesic effect of both and began toying with the meperidine molecule. This is also why the nitazenes hold the properties they do as analgesics as well based on what we know today.

So, that all being said, is there an extensive list of information on such things available anywhere online or in a book perhaps?

I am just trying to make sense out of the things I have been observing over the years regarding various research chemicals that have come about (some of which I may or may not have sampled myself depending on who is asking.) If I were able to better understand these things, then it would help me solve an even bigger portion of the metaphorical puzzle I have been trying to put together over all these years. It may also lead to the discovery of some novel and interesting psychoactive compounds in the longer term, but regardless of the outcome it would be greatly appreciated if anyone could fill me in on the knowledge I am seeking. Thank you in advance!

 

[username_required]

the term you are looking for is structure-activity relationship. as for if there’s any sort of structure-subjective effect relationship, i’m fairly certain the answer to that question is no, it isn’t possible to determine the actual psychedelic effects of a molecule just based on its structure. i suspect the reddit post you’re thinking of probably said something about DMT and it’s derivatives (psilocin, 5-MeO-DMT) as those are generally most associated with that sort of hallucination, but that isn’t really something that can be predicted outside of similarities to other existing drugs.

 

[ShulginsReincarnation]

the term you are looking for is structure-activity relationship. as for if there’s any sort of structure-subjective effect relationship, i’m fairly certain the answer to that question is no, it isn’t possible to determine the actual psychedelic effects of a molecule just based on its structure. i suspect the reddit post you’re thinking of probably said something about DMT and it’s derivatives (psilocin, 5-MeO-DMT) as those are generally most associated with that sort of hallucination, but that isn’t really something that can be predicted outside of similarities to other existing drugs.

Yes, I am aware that what I am referencing is closely related to SAR. However, as you mentioned there is more to this than simply SAR considering the fact that DiPT (for example) binds to 5HT2A receptor subtype yet only produces auditory hallucination whereas psilocin binds to the same receptor subtype and produces visual hallucinations. There is something missing here obviously, and that was what I was trying to get at; is anyone else thinking like I am on this yet or no? Are there any studies looking at the specifics yet, or no?

We have, for example, GABAa receptor ligands bind to certain subunits of the GABAa receptors more so or less so and produce more specific effects. So, for further example, GABAa receptor ligands with high activity at the α1 and/or α5 tend to be more associated with sedation, ataxia, and amnesia whereas those with higher activity at GABAA receptors containing α2 and/or α3 subunits generally have greater anxiolytic activity.

Now, getting back to my point in having asked what I did: Is there any solid data proving that there are subunits to the 5HT2A receptor being affected differently depending on the way these ligands prefer to bind? Because this only seems to make sense, and since we are just now entering the era in which psychedelic studies is permitted once more I think more attention should be being paid in this area of study if not. We now have a lot better tools to determine such things than we did last time we looked into these type of compounds as a human race.

So, once more, are there any good resources available to find out what we DO know about such or is this something that has yet to be bothered with by medical scientists?

P.S. Yes, the post was talking about substituted tryptamines that are analogous with 4-HO-DMT but that really wasn't the focus of the post considering it talked on other aspects of how the tryptamines interacted in terms of subjective effect based on their chemical structures aside from the vague mention of how the methyl group plays a part in such. Good guess though.

 

[username_required]

there’s no need to act like a superior dickhead “ShulginsReincarnation”. there is no evidence of a specific “structure-effect relationship” as i’ll refer to it as, nor is there any evidence of 5HT2AR subunits. there are different signalling pathways, amongst different reactions from 5HT2A activation.

edit: meant to say signalling pathways

 

[24HourPangolin]

I have no prefessional background in the subject but personally I learned a lot from Dr. Andrew Gallimore's Psychedelic Neuroscience Master Course on YouTube. It is tryptamine focused but goes into into a lot of detail, which I suspect woudl interest you.

I found the video list after reading his book Reality Switch Technologies, which I'd also highly recomend.

On the subject of his books/course, would anybody who actually conducts reasearch in or works in the field offer their view of his ideas? I'm just an outsider with an interest in the topic so have no background to judge them against.

 

[ShulginsReincarnation]

there’s no need to act like a superior dickhead “ShulginsReincarnation”. there is no evidence of a specific “structure-effect relationship” as i’ll refer to it as, nor is there any evidence of 5HT2AR subunits. there are different signalling pathways, amongst different reactions from 5HT2A activation.

edit: meant to say signalling pathways

I wasn't acting like anything. I was asking you to clarify your answer by providing more insight into my line of thinking so you could do so. I appreciate you elaborating in a more direct manner on what your thoughts were on the matter. This is called "communication" if you were not familiar lol

Anyway, thanks for the response as it seems most logical of all the ones I could find. However, it means to me still yet that further scientific investigation is merited to determine a more exact response. Your response is helpful, and it is the best we have at this time being that we as humans still do not fully understand the exacts.

I have no prefessional background in the subject but personally I learned a lot from Dr. Andrew Gallimore's Psychedelic Neuroscience Master Course on YouTube. It is tryptamine focused but goes into into a lot of detail, which I suspect woudl interest you.

I found the video list after reading his book Reality Switch Technologies, which I'd also highly recomend.

On the subject of his books/course, would anybody who actually conducts reasearch in or works in the field offer their view of his ideas? I'm just an outsider with an interest in the topic so have no background to judge them against.

Thanks, I skimmed the video that linked to and it seems worthy of a watch! I appreciate videos like these as they usually provide some new insights and are extremely helpful to those totally new to this field of study and have many many questions. Being that the answers/explanations are from a doctor its all the better due to a doctor being more credible than some guy who may or may not have consumed dozens of psychoactive substances in his life just to see what the outcome(s) would be lol

 

[ShulginsReincarnation]

I have no prefessional background in the subject but personally I learned a lot from Dr. Andrew Gallimore's Psychedelic Neuroscience Master Course on YouTube. It is tryptamine focused but goes into into a lot of detail, which I suspect woudl interest you.

I found the video list after reading his book Reality Switch Technologies, which I'd also highly recomend.

On the subject of his books/course, would anybody who actually conducts reasearch in or works in the field offer their view of his ideas? I'm just an outsider with an interest in the topic so have no background to judge them against.

I am now on episode 13 of his series you linked off to here now just to give an update. So far, the course is taking people from the beginning of understanding neuroscience; its literally very close to what I learned from my college textbook on such so far. I will update when he gets to the more interesting aspects of it all though which will likely be toward the end of it all. So far, so good though. Gives a little more detail into cognitive neuroscience than my introductory textbook I referred to before though in case anyone is wondering.