-
PD Moderators: Esperighanto | JackARoe |
Why are psychedilcs so long lasting im general
- Thread starter gymstud
- Start date
cannibalsnail
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Sep 18, 2011
- Messages
- 320
Salvia isnt a psychedelic, DMT and 5-meo-dmt last 4-6 hours when consumed orally.
Basically a necessary aspect of a psychedelic drug is resistance to enzymatic breakdown, hence your body cannot clear them easily so they tend to linger.
Basically a necessary aspect of a psychedelic drug is resistance to enzymatic breakdown, hence your body cannot clear them easily so they tend to linger.
4-ho-dipt is short, and is active orally. so is 5-meo dalt, both over under 4 hours even to a guy quite sensitive like myself.
also, just because dmt lasts hours when taken orally, doesnt mean its not short acting, the smoked dmt lasting under an hour. same substance....
i dont think this thread is going anywhere.
might as well ask why stims have so much residual stimulation.... ive not had a stim that keeps me up for less than 4 hours at least.
cheers!
also, just because dmt lasts hours when taken orally, doesnt mean its not short acting, the smoked dmt lasting under an hour. same substance....
i dont think this thread is going anywhere.
might as well ask why stims have so much residual stimulation.... ive not had a stim that keeps me up for less than 4 hours at least.
cheers!
IamMe90
Bluelighter
He's asking what the pharmacological/metabolic/whatever reason is that the vast majority psychedelics have the potential to far outlast other classes of drugs in duration. You guys are just pointing out exceptions to the rules, and I'm not sure why, because we all know as a class psychedelics last much longer than other drugs.
ebola?
Bluelight Crew
This is not true.
ebola
1394
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 653
Salvia isn't a psychedelic? Fuuuckk, that's new to me.
IamMe90
Bluelighter
Sorry, that was a generalization or not precisely worded, but can we agree that psychedelics have a long duration of action? Especially compared to most popular -non pharmaceutical- compounds. If this isn't true either, I'd be glad for you to educate me, but as far as I'm aware there aren't too many well known compounds used for non medical purposes that last as long as most psychedelic drugs. Of course there are long acting stimulants but there are far more short acting stimulants than short acting psychedelics.
Uh, no I don't think it's true at all. What drugs are you talking about? Opiates last as long as psychedelics, heck pod tea can last for entire day! Oral amphetamines last just as long, if not longer than psychedelics. Last time I did dexedrine, I didn't sleep for 2 nights. Alcohol, despite its short half life, will easily last as long as a mushroom or lsd trip if enough is consumed. Benzodiazepines also, can easily last as long as a psychedelic trip if you don't have a high tolerance, the first time I took diazepam I woke up 17 hours later still under the influence.
1394
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2009
- Messages
- 653
I think he is confused. Salvia is definitely a psychedelic.
Psychedelics are no shorter than other classes of drugs.
How long do stimulants last? Generally 4-6 hours or longer.
How long do opiates last? Generally 4-6 hours or longer.
How long do benzos last? Usually much longer.
How long does E last? 4-6 hours
And so on.
Pattern seems to be that most orally active drugs last at least 4-6 hours - if the body shredded them faster, they wouldn't be orally active because they'd be broken down as you absorbed them (this is why DMT isn't orally active, for example). There are of course some exceptions, but not very many - most faster drugs don't work well orally, because they get broken down too fast.
It gets lumped into that group because there's no better category to put it in (as it's the only kappa opioid agonist used recreationally) , but it's so different that you cannot generalize between typical (serotonergic) psychedelics and salvia in any way.
How long do stimulants last? Generally 4-6 hours or longer.
How long do opiates last? Generally 4-6 hours or longer.
How long do benzos last? Usually much longer.
How long does E last? 4-6 hours
And so on.
Pattern seems to be that most orally active drugs last at least 4-6 hours - if the body shredded them faster, they wouldn't be orally active because they'd be broken down as you absorbed them (this is why DMT isn't orally active, for example). There are of course some exceptions, but not very many - most faster drugs don't work well orally, because they get broken down too fast.
It gets lumped into that group because there's no better category to put it in (as it's the only kappa opioid agonist used recreationally) , but it's so different that you cannot generalize between typical (serotonergic) psychedelics and salvia in any way.
The whole debate about whether salvia is a psychedelic depends on what definition of psychedelic youre using. I think psychedelic means mind manifesting. Thus, any drug which twists your mind around, as opposed to just producing euphoria while leaving the ego intact, is a psychedelic. Some people call ketamine a psychedelic for instance. The other definition of psychedelic is drugs that produce kaleidoscope visuals, in which case ketamine and salvia are not psychedelics.
I dont find salvia to be similar to ketamine either.
Escapedysphoria
Ex-Bluelighter
I'm confused by the OP's question for some reason, honestly. LSD or Mescaline are examples of long duration psychedelics to my knowledge.
Never experimented with the 2C-x family. I'd love to try 2C-B, 2C-I, 2C-E, ect. I'll have to ride out some of the intense and sometimes, uncomfortable bodyloads of the 2C's (2C-E in particular).
Never experimented with the 2C-x family. I'd love to try 2C-B, 2C-I, 2C-E, ect. I'll have to ride out some of the intense and sometimes, uncomfortable bodyloads of the 2C's (2C-E in particular).
Cyanoide
Bluelighter
Being visual or not indeed has nothing to do with a compound being a psychedelic or not.
If we stick strictly to pharmacology, psychedelics are 5-HT2A receptor agonists. When using this definition, Salvia, Ketamine, MXE, MDMA and Cannabis just to name a few are excluded. All of these are subjectively sometimes experienced as psychedelic or considered psychedelics. I tend to stick to the pharmacological definition. Subjective experiences can not be used as a definition for a class of drugs IMO. There has to be stricter criteria. It would be impossible to distinguish between them otherwise.
Last edited:
The problem with the pharmacological definition is precisely the fact that it excludes cannabis. I do believe salvia, ketamine and MXE belong to an entirely different class of drug. However cannabis (and to a lessor extent MDMA) has a lot in common with 5-HT2A receptor agonist psychedelics. I believe that cannabis is a psychedelic drug and belongs alongside 5-HT2A receptor agonists as another class, or subclass of psychedelic drug. All drug of this class have the same basic effects on the human mind. They tend to produce kaleidoscope/geometric visuals. They tend to dilate time. They tend to increase awareness of sensory experience. They tend to produce philosophical thinking. They tend produce feelings of connectedness/dissolution of egoic boundaries. It's worth keeping in mind that just because one or more of these aspects is missing from your personal experience, doesn't mean a drug doesn't fit in this class.
For example, just because you don't see kaleidoscope patterns everywhere doesn't mean a drug isn't in this class. I've had mushroom trips that produced no visuals. And yet, if a mushroom trip does produce visuals, they will be geometric in nature. Whereas, ketamine visuals are not necessarily geometric. That is what I meant by that definition. I have not taken DiPT, however my guess is that it is psychedelic and if it were to produce visuals they would be geometric in nature.
This is just one way of defining what a psychedelic is. It is not meant to be absolute or perfect or taken in an overly literal sense as in "ah I didn't see shapes therefore it's not psychedelic". You have to use your imagination a bit, but in my opinion it is a useful definition. I am not saying the pharmacological definition isn't useful as well, but it doesn't know what to do with a drug like cannabis which works differently but shares many effects in common with 5-HT2A receptor agonist psychedelics. If the question is psychedelic or not? I would have to say cannabis is a psychedelic.
For example, just because you don't see kaleidoscope patterns everywhere doesn't mean a drug isn't in this class. I've had mushroom trips that produced no visuals. And yet, if a mushroom trip does produce visuals, they will be geometric in nature. Whereas, ketamine visuals are not necessarily geometric. That is what I meant by that definition. I have not taken DiPT, however my guess is that it is psychedelic and if it were to produce visuals they would be geometric in nature.
This is just one way of defining what a psychedelic is. It is not meant to be absolute or perfect or taken in an overly literal sense as in "ah I didn't see shapes therefore it's not psychedelic". You have to use your imagination a bit, but in my opinion it is a useful definition. I am not saying the pharmacological definition isn't useful as well, but it doesn't know what to do with a drug like cannabis which works differently but shares many effects in common with 5-HT2A receptor agonist psychedelics. If the question is psychedelic or not? I would have to say cannabis is a psychedelic.
Last edited:
There can be more than one way to classify drugs co-existing. Pharmacologically is one way and I have no problem with that. But take for instance, benzodiazepines and barbituates. Pharmacologically they are different and yet medically they are both classified as depressants. Each classification is useful in its own way. For instance, if you want to go to sleep, you would look for drugs that fall under the classification of depressants, whereas if you want a drug with a very similar effects profile you would look under the pharmacological classification.