Do you think LSD has any benefits?

[Techne]

A peer review with a retarded topic like this wont even pass ethical clearence stages, its not even worthy for honors.

Oh, I didn't mean on LSD lol. Of course not. Forget the kooky druggies, get back to your research.

 

[Synaesthesia]

-LSD is less toxic than asprin. Its also incredibly difficult to cut with other chemicals, if not down right impossible in blotter form. No other psychoactive can fit on a 1cm square piece of paper that can even remotely affect you, with the exception of a few incredibly rare substances, I doubt you would have to worry about it.

There are actually a lot of substances which are active in the 1-5mg range, which would indeed fit on a blotter, so I wouldn't say that's entirely accurate.

 

[copacetic]

Dude! You have just wasted your own time by typing out perfectly legitimate science to explain it to druggies :erm:.

It's this attitude I had/have no desire to engage with, by the way...

 

[RiaX]

Asprin is more toxic yes, but LSD dangers dont come from its physical ability to overwhelm the body by forming toxic metabolites. Look into the formation of NAPQ for paracetamol poisoning. That the type of toxicity they refering to. Its not black and white sir

 

[RiaX]

Oh, I didn't mean on LSD lol. Of course not. Forget the kooky druggies, get back to your research.

That research is too complex to even think about at the moment, im planing to create a dermatological prep to change treatment universally for a very rare disease

 

[crysis]

There are actually a lot of substances which are active in the 1-5mg range, which would indeed fit on a blotter, so I wouldn't say that's entirely accurate.

I think you would find that 1 - 5mg wouldn't be soluble (right word?) in that quantity of paper, so you would easily see it. I.e. paper covered in powder or something.

 

[Synaesthesia]

Asprin is more toxic yes, but LSD dangers dont come from its physical ability to overwhelm the body by forming toxic metabolites. Look into the formation of NAPQ for paracetamol poisoning. That the type of toxicity they refering to. Its not black and white sir

Who is they? Paracetamol is quite toxic, yes.

 

[AstroTurf]

Because mine are from medical textbooks not some author's opinion ?
My documentry in an independant documentry from national geographic ? just goes to show this is about winning for you defending or justifying LSD to yourself, I dont really care if you take LSD nor do I care if you believe me lol, goes to show how much you know about getting credible information. Like those idiots that think the government is putting fluorine in toothpaste to mind control the public.

ROFL "shelf-life" yes like a drug dealer gives a f**k about shelf life its got to be stable enough for people to buy it, none of you can even start an assay and you want to talk big about shelf-life. Please go read on storage conditions of substances and effects on shelf-life and how long you must do shelf-life tests. Next thing you going to tell me your street LSD comes with a batch number and expiry date... well done man, well done *thumbs up*

You do know LSD is an organic molecule, it degrades fast with light, heat and water. Does your LSD come in a blister pack? or amber stained glass? cause Alfred Hoffman's product did . When you bought your LSD what was the preservative they used did you check the ingredients listed in the back? oh wait thats right, it was made in a bath tub or imported in shady conditions to avoid police thats right. There is no point even referencing material to a person like you who lacks common sense.



A peer review with a retarded topic like this wont even pass ethical clearence stages, its not even worthy for honors. You do this topic when you present it to the board everyone will be like "so why you doing this research? we know this". Why you think any person to suggest medical uses of LSD in an important position has been fired or is now dead ? why do you think this research doesnt exist ? its like doing research to say "does the sun exist?" the cases are there in hospital files if you a medical professional you would see the cases and have access to it. the lay person doesnt believe in it because they assume they are the normality, they say "oh panado doesnt work" suddendly they assume paracetamol is ineffective for the whole world, its the arrogance of the unskilled - I see it quite often thats why I still have the patience to post here.

They still ask for evidence on cardiotoxicity lol, I've provide the most relevant evidence from a collection of all south african assessments complied by UCT med school. They refute it lol, and ask for evidence :wtf:

They claim LSD has good properties, defend backyard stuff. Yet they say things like nexiam and all of nexiam's research is wrong just use omeprazole. The sheer arrogance. Saying "LSD can be used for alcoholism" is like saying "I think you should treat that sore throat with surgery" both will work in isolated events, but its not a real option. Other than the nonsense their friends tell them and the tons of rubbish floating on the internet people these days assume they know it all because they have the powerhouse google at their fingertips, yet they simply cant process the information that is presented. If you look at all the information sourced its comes from two sources, wikipedia and a LSD pro site (bias much?)

They cant determine the difference between information, since when if something is stated in a book that makes it true? so far all they have quote is a few THEORIES by a few people. You have quoted journal articles from pharmacology journal. I have quoted from in field experience and physiology (which they want references for so it I quote gravity next time I will be sure to put Newton's papers as a reference). I've quoted from the SAMF which is the most important textbook for medical practice in south africa. Ive sourced information from a pharmacopeia, medicinal chemistry textbooks and pharmacology textbooks and its all been conviently ignored and as astroturf has shown, they dont even bother to read a shred of it. Im truely not interested in educating the people of the forum, I have an ulterior motive to this thread dude, normally I wouldnt waste my time with such stubborness. Perhaps I can use this thread for a Pharmaceutical care paper there is enough research on the unwillingness of patients like a quick and easy masters for me



yeah sorry about that I dont proof read or copy and paste just type D: . See I can have this debate without google/wikipedia in person.

You know nothing about the topic at hand and are not willing to enlighten yourself.
Your loss

With your writing style I'd bet my 4yo daughter would be able to do her masters before you. You have been caught out, you have no clue about the topic at hand. Just another pretender on the net.

 

[Synaesthesia]

I think you would find that 1 - 5mg wouldn't be soluble (right word?) in that quantity of paper, so you would easily see it. I.e. paper covered in powder or something.

It would be. I've heard of blotters of Xanax, DOB, 25I-NBOME and more.

 

[RiaX]

Who is they? Paracetamol is quite toxic, yes.

You get physical toxicity i.e toxic metabolites and you get and change in chemical balance which can also be toxic. In this regard paracetamol although having a worse LD50 profile than LSD is safer than LSD from every angle you look at it. People dont understand what is meant by toxicity. Do you see now how paracetamol is safer than LSD yet not as toxic?

 

[RiaX]

You know nothing about the topic at hand and are not willing to enlighten yourself.
Your loss

With your writing style I'd bet my 4yo daughter would be able to do her masters before you. You have been caught out, you have no clue about the topic at hand. Just another pretender on the net.

Have you even been to school ? perhaps you need a psychiatrist, you perception is warped .... I wonder why

 

[Sensorei]

hmmmm unfortunately its against the law to release hospital files without ethical clearence so I cant go and get hospital records for LSD indueced psychosis.



Lippincott's illustrated reviews, Pharmacology 3rd edition. Richard D Howland, Mary J Mycek. Pg 122-123



South African Medical Formulary, 7th ed. page 550

Okay now into manufacture of LSD.

There are other quite a few other ways besides that to sythesize LSD using lysergic Acid or using the amide straight from morning glory seeds or ergot. Yes, the method you mentioned is generally used as the quickest way to get a high yield by syndicates but there is an easier method that I'm sure many chem students have used using hydrazine and very easy to get chems like hcl, bicarb, and I think NaNO3. Diethylamine is the only schlep to get but these days anything is pretty easily obtained. You might end up with more of the inactive LSD isomer (which is harmless) than ideal but still a lot of LSD. All this without having to do the more complicated work of isomerisation, separation, purification etc.

This used to happen a lot and with the huge trance party scene in SA these days I'm sure quite a few curious people are doing it.

 

[AstroTurf]

Have you even been to school ? perhaps you need a psychiatrist, you perception is warped .... I wonder why

To childish for a real response

 

[RiaX]

Millions and millions you say. Well that may actually help explain the high incidence of cardiac failure lol.

( + other people talking about cardiotoxicity/cardiac failure)

Cardiac failure and cardiac toxicity is not the same thing. Saying its not cardiotoxic because millions of people take it and dont die is silly (on this note has your so called reports followed up on the subjects long term? probably not). Cardiotoxic does not mean you will develop cardiac pathologies, like with smoking it increases your risk for cancer but its incorrect to say it will give you cancer. All it says its damaging to the cardiac tissue thats all. Also quoting LD50 is not going to help prove safety when you dont even understand the concept of LD50. LD50 DOES NOT EQUATE TO SAFETY PROFILE. LD50 is used to assess the therapeutic index of a drug.

Dextropropoxyphene an opioid derivative which was cardiotoxic, commonly known as lentogesic and was included in preparations like synap forte in south africa. It was later removed from the market. It didnt kill people but caused cardiac arrythms, these translate into risks. Now consider the safety versus the risk profile:

You got a drug that damages the heart. Can lead to myocardial infarction, SVT and exacebate underlying heart conditions. Can indeuce class 1 to 4 heart failure in a patient. Whats the purpose of detropropoxyphene? Its used to treat extreme pain. Do we have analgesia that with no cardiotoxicity? yes.

Hence it was banned.

LSD is the same.

What LSD does? psychedelic, induces hallucinations
Does it damage the body? Yes, via neurological stimulation of 5-HT receptors, cardiotoxicity occurs will exacebate existing heart conditions. Cannot be used in pregnancy has the possible to cause a misscarriage as it induces uterine contractions. Has the potential to irreversably damage a patients mental state causing permanent psychosis.

Whats its uses? no known approved clinical use. Tested for psychiatric use - non effective. Considered for anxiety however showed less efficacy and success than known and safer benzodiazepines. Consideed for treatment of alcoholism, showed a potential use however success rate and efficacy was less than the drug of choice antabuse (disulfram). Disulfram has greater clinical safety profile.

LSD banned. Perhaps if the scientists had more time with LSD maybe a use couldve been found, but the hippies fked it up. Its potential for abuse (1960s is evidence for abuse) and its impractical mental state got it banned. Take LSD 3 to 4 times a day to treat something and go to work for 5 days can you ? no you cant. Medically useless. In a terminally ill stage 4 cancer patient with respect to fear of death, benzodiazepines will work just fine. Give LSD to a patient with a brain tumor and they will die, increased CNS activity will indeuce a seizure resulting in a heart attack and death (thats how you die with a brain tumour btw).

That is how a medical substance is evaluated risk versus gain. Look at anti-neoplastics, OMW they destroy the body BADLY they not banned because the option is be in pain, suffer, lose function of your body for a HOPE to survive OR just die. LSD had no real use, even its creator didnt know what to do with it.


Just for your information, you know exercise can be bad for the heart? If you increase your heart rate and you cause an oxygen debt this causes the heart to fail. Its common in huge body builders, they die of cardiac failure their body gets so big it requires more blood. More blood means a harder working heart. That means the heart is required to be more muscular. When the heart is more muscular its myocardial oxygen demand goes up and so does the wall tension. Eventually the lungs and body cant keep up with the demand for oxygen and the heart begins to fail. This is a slow process, you dont get cardiac failure overnight, unless its anaphalatic shock or trauma (blood loss), which is also shock. See how the base knowledge is so important with just two concepts "cardiotoxicity" and "LD50" if you have incomplete knowledge with any concept, its as good as not knowing a thing about the concept.



ROFL I like these refreshers , sjoe making me think to things I had to write years ago for exams D:

 

[RiaX]

There are other quite a few other ways besides that to sythesize LSD using lysergic Acid or using the amide straight from morning glory seeds or ergot. Yes, the method you mentioned is generally used as the quickest way to get a high yield by syndicates but there is an easier method that I'm sure many chem students have used using hydrazine and very easy to get chems like hcl, bicarb, and I think NaNO3. Diethylamine is the only schlep to get but these days anything is pretty easily obtained. You might end up with more of the inactive LSD isomer (which is harmless) than ideal but still a lot of LSD. All this without having to do the more complicated work of isomerisation, separation, purification etc.

This used to happen a lot and with the huge trance party scene in SA these days I'm sure quite a few curious people are doing it.

Certain forensic reports stated this but apparently the extraction process from morning glory seeds interferes with the whole process. The yeild is not cost effective either for the chemist.

Plus its a pain to directly work with plants. Its takes forever, you could make a personal batch in this manner but then you wont get pharmaceutical grade chemicals, you will get industrial which would be good enough I suppose.

 

[RiaX]

To childish for a real response

following by example

 

[TheRush]

This thread started off really interesting.... Until RiaX decided to showcase what a complete ass_hole he/she is :/

And btw - this LSD has me very intrigued right now :O

 

[RiaX]

lol okay thats nice. The rest of us will continue to post about street LSD, purity, manufacture, uses, pros and cons for educational purpose like the thread said. You just focus on the fancy colours, go to a drug forum where you can discuss your highs with other people

 

[zippy]

I haven't seen a shred of evidence presented in this thread, that LSD from a drug dealer is dangerous...

Yeah, and drug dealers are societies most reliable people and would never dilute their drugs......

 

[Synaesthesia]

Thanks for the response Riax, some of this is very interesting to me. Lets not let it degenerate into a fight, we can keep it civil right? I figured it would be slightly cardiotoxic because of its stimulatory nature. It also therefore occurred to me that exercise is cardiotoxic.

Some of the other things you say I don't know if they're true. Yes it's true that LD50 is not an indicator of safety profile, I just haven't heard of the other side effects. The uterine contractions are one side effect I have heard of. Give LSD to someone with a brain tumour and the will die p? Really?

When Hoffman discovered LSD, he said it was the most important psychiatric drug, since the discovery of the benzodiazepines. But it was basically the opposite what they did. Whereas benzodiazepines are anti-anxiolytic in effect, LSD makes you more anxious. How can that be clinically useful? Well instead of numbing away your anxiety, you actually become sensitised to it, so you can explore it more deeply and confront it on a deeper level.

The way LSD is used is not as a prescriptive drug, like take this everyday and you'll feel fine, it's taken maybe once or twice ever, with a guide who talks about psychological issues as they arise during and after the trip.

Anyway, it's the benzodiazepines that have become real drugs of abuse too! Xanax is such a great feeling but I suffer tremendous memory loss, loss of coordination and dizziness. It's very addictive.