Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

wired.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 200 posts

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#121

Post by kaoD »

14 wrote: post #45
NickC25 wrote: post #5

There was an NYT article not too long ago whose entire point is that "true" psychedelic drugs are too dangerous to go mainstream, but isolated chemical compounds that provide some of the chemical effects of LSD / Mushrooms / Ketamine without the "trip" were a much better way to go. The reasoning was that they could engineer a way to chemically induce neuroplastic change in the brain without the liability of visual or…

Where does one buy LSD this day and age. Doesn’t seem very popular in my neck of the woods and have not heard anyone having it since I was in high school 20 years ago.

I recommend staying away from street dealers. There was a huge influx of NBOx compounds sold as LSD blotters since 2017 (apparently there was a global LSD shortage around that year, and IIRC they're cheaper to produce?) Their safety profile is not well-understood but it looks like it's riskier than the (very safe) LSD due to their vasoconstriction effects, and fatal doses aren't that high compared to active doses, unlike LSD which has a huge buffer.

Also people tend to describe their trips as being subjectively less pleasant.

And please, if you have to resort to dealers, invest in a cheap testing kit. You might be lucky and find a nearby non-profit that can not only do a cheap reactive test, but also a purity test.

Stay safe out there.

EDIT: Sibling comments also mention compounds like 1P-LSD sold online. I'd still test those even if bought from reputable vendors.

Anyways, their safety profiles aren't really that well understood either. They're suspected to be just metabolized into LSD and therefore pretty safe, but they're very new (~2015) and after all they're research chemicals (or rather, not-yet-researched chemicals). In comparison LSD had been known for decades and it's pretty well understood.

I guess this is what prohibition leads to...

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#122

Post by scythe »

BLO716 wrote: post #48

Here's a legit question - what is single driving factor for increases in substance abuse? Asking for a friend.

In adolescents, it's exposure to violence and/or family members' drug abuse. The latter is very unsurprising.

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2000-13544-003

>Major findings were (a) adolescents who had been physically assaulted, who had been sexually assaulted, who had witnessed violence, or who had family members with alcohol or drug use problems had increased risk for current substance abuse/dependence; (b) posttraumatic stress disorder independently increased risk of marijuana and hard drug abuse/dependence; and (c) when effects of other variables were controlled, African Americans, but not Hispanics or Native Americans, were at approximately 1/3 the risk of substance abuse/dependence as Caucasians. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#123

Post by tayo42 »

criddell wrote: post #14
game-of-throws wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really what "normies" want? Or is it just what drug companies/lobbyists want?

I think at least some normies want that. I'm pretty much as normie as it gets and I've been watching Michael Pollan's series on Netflix How to Change Your Mind . One day I might want to try LSD, psilocybin, or MDMA (those are the episodes I've watched) but probably wouldn't until I could buy from an FDA regulated company. I don't trust dark web sources or the neighborhood guy who knows a guy.

You can test what you buy with multiple reagent tests to make sure what you have is what you think it is. You can even send to labs if your extra paranoid. Also the dw runs on reviews. Some one selling something fake won't last long. Some have reputations from years of selling.

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#124

Post by user90323432 »

NickC25 wrote: post #5

There was an NYT article not too long ago whose entire point is that "true" psychedelic drugs are too dangerous to go mainstream, but isolated chemical compounds that provide some of the chemical effects of LSD / Mushrooms / Ketamine without the "trip" were a much better way to go. The reasoning was that they could engineer a way to chemically induce neuroplastic change in the brain without the liability of visual or…

The problem is that Pharma companies can't patent and sell a full spectrum product. They can only make the big bucks by getting a certain compound approved after going through the full FDA process on that one particular compound. It's the same thing we saw with kratom. The FDA had multiple attempts over the last 7 years to ban it, while kratom is basically as harmless as coffee. It took a massive grassroots effort to stop the ban. Then shortly after it comes out that GlaxoSmithKline, who the FDA head (Scott Gottlieb) at the time of the attempted ban sat on the board for just a year prior, was trying to bring synthetic 7-hydroxy-mitragynine (7hm is thought to be a main active ingredient in kratom) to market, which it has a patent on. Follow the money people

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#125

Post by thatcat »

User23 wrote: post #68
sianemo wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I may not be someone you want to be for specific reasons relating to our individuality, I am a long time psych user and I'm demographically and overall culturally someone that is presented as desirable to be. I'm in a reasonably high income percentile, I lack unsecured debt, I'm happily married, I have a diverse social circle and several personal hobbies, I stay physically active, and I enjoy intellectual pursu…

I know alcoholics who are well to do, out of debt, happily married, and have a diverse social circle and several personal hobbies, get exercise, and enjoy thinking. None of that shows the merits of alcoholism. I can't speak for the person you're replying to, but I could guess that it's your drug addiction that they have no desire to emulate. Addicts insisting that their addiction isn't one is cliché for a reason.

alcohol is neurotoxic and addictive. psychs are neurotrophic and non-addictive, but the purity isn't guaranteed. Impurities are common in blackmarkets.

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#126

Post by debenedictis »

WalterSear wrote: post #38
NickC25 wrote: post #5

There was an NYT article not too long ago whose entire point is that "true" psychedelic drugs are too dangerous to go mainstream, but isolated chemical compounds that provide some of the chemical effects of LSD / Mushrooms / Ketamine without the "trip" were a much better way to go. The reasoning was that they could engineer a way to chemically induce neuroplastic change in the brain without the liability of visual or…

> The whole transformative experience is the "trip" itself. IMHE, it's not, at least in regards to (racemic) ketamine and depression. The benefit doesn't appear until ~24 hours later, and the effect scales with dosage, but not trip intensity or outcome. I found taking it almost unpleasant at times, but the subsequent effects uniformly profound. Unfortunately, I developed a rare health issue, or I'd still be taking it…

I too developed a rare health issue, OABSS.

"In our study, OABSS (overactive bladder symptom score) significantly increased with the combined use of ketamine and marijuana (P = 0.016). Cannabinoids are the active components of marijuana, and select cannabinoid receptors, CB1 and CB2, have been identified in the human detrusor and urothelium."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6510790/

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#127

Post by toss1 »

scythe wrote: post #81
User23 wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know alcoholics who are well to do, out of debt, happily married, and have a diverse social circle and several personal hobbies, get exercise, and enjoy thinking. None of that shows the merits of alcoholism. I can't speak for the person you're replying to, but I could guess that it's your drug addiction that they have no desire to emulate. Addicts insisting that their addiction isn't one is cliché for a reason.

High frequency of use is a necessary condition for addiction.

>>necessary condition for addiction. Necessary, but not sufficient

You might also note that the GP said nothing about frequency of use, only "long time psych user", AND that no one here has defined "high frequency" in terms of an actual threshold for addiction.

The fact is that for all drugs, and especially for the psychedelics, there are far many more people who use occasionally and responsibly than the subset who are addicted. AFAIK, the psychedelics are not considered addictive at all, either physically/physiologically or mentally.

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#128

Post by Gatsky »

labrador wrote: post #2

It's sad that the only way to legalize is to force people to see a qualified therapist and take patented psychedelics in order to benefit from the experience, but that's what the normies want. I've taken them with a therapist and it was meh because the doctor/patient relationship became weird under the influence. On the other hand I've had peak experiences by myself alone in a redwood forest on a fresh clear morning.

These drugs clearly have risks. I know a case who took LSD and amputated his genitals during the trip (heard this first hand from the urologist who reattached said genitals). Sure, many or even most people will be fine, but some clearly won’t. Sure, he has a mental illness and took too much and was alone, but that’s exactly the issue. Do you have any suggestions how to make these drugs broadly safe without giving in to the supposedly unreasonable demands of the ‘normies’?

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#129

Post by jeffreyrogers »

huetius wrote: post #11

With the collapse of the SSRI hypothesis, I feel like there was a missed opportunity to interrogate what it is about the affluent, technological society that makes such a staggering number of people so depressed. It seems that we will instead (characteristically) plow forward with even more powerful drugs.

I don't think that the collapse of the serotonin hypothesis means that SSRI's don't work, just that they don't work via increasing serotonin levels.

Re: The high-stakes race to engineer new psychedelic drugs

#130

Post by kennyloginz »

jokowueu wrote: post #105
elevaet wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did you end up getting to test tabernanthalog and these other novel compounds?

I belong to a group where we group our money together to either get the required precursors to make them or hire chemists over seas . It's quite easy but larger quantities are required to bring down the cost There are a lot of other substances as well just recently we were able to procure very cheap rapamycin for people with autoimmune issues If you are interested in joining or just look around reply to me here

How do I join? ( serious question)
Post reply on HN