Psilocybin Produced in Yeast • Hacker News Board

Re: Psilocybin Produced in Yeast

#191

Post by SketchySeaBeast » Mon, Apr 20, 2020, 7:28 PM UTC

mistermann wrote: post #186

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://psychedelicreview.com/why-do-magic-mushrooms-cause-n... It would seem that at least some people think Nausea is a problem.

Claim: "You'll find nausea and vomiting in just about every discussion about consuming psilocybin mushrooms . Challenge: "I know this statement is false, because I've read thousands of discussions. I challenge you to attempt to prove your assertion with evidence. If you make an attempt, you will quickly realize that you are objectively incorrect." Response (from the claimant, thus far): Reply (third party): "It would…

You're right, the "just about every" is unproveable. But you can't win the argument that nausea and vomiting isn't a concern by saying that the use of "just about every discussion" is wrong, and if you've decided to focus on that aspect you've now switched the topic. I doubt very much the original author intended that to be a scientific fact, and more of a expression of its prevalence. Where some see accuracy others see pedantry and an attempt to exclude an otherwise point simply because of inaccurate language. Also, I didn't attempt to defend the "every", but instead re-frame the claim in more balanced terms, which proves that, at least for some, it's a concern.

Re: Psilocybin Produced in Yeast

#192

Post by hahajk » Mon, Apr 20, 2020, 7:30 PM UTC

RIMR wrote: post #188

tehjoker wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Generally, most genetic modifications like these are harmful to the competitiveness of the microorganism in the wild. It's possible that producing psilocybin could help it be more competitive, but this would be the exception rather than the rule. Generally, the organism expends so much energy and material producing the engineered substance that it's worse at doing other things.

Imagine if it actually started beating out other yeasts until we starting having difficulty baking bread that doesn't make people hallucinate. I'm not saying this is likely to happen, but just imagine...

Well yeast already produces alcohol!

Re: Psilocybin Produced in Yeast

#193

Post by sysbin » Mon, Apr 20, 2020, 7:33 PM UTC

bawolff wrote: post #190

sysbin wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please can you provide sources?

A source that people believe that psilocybin helps them achieve a mystical state? Or a source about something else? Isn't the defining feature of a mystical experience that the participant feels that they had one (its a concept about subjective internal states, not an objective thing to measure beyond i guess self-reported surveys). Given that its going to be self reported anyways, i think the general acedotes about…

I'm interested in a scientific study of how it was somehow linked to spiritual. I'm aware of drugs in general changing mental states of people that suffer from different illnesses. I've tried shrooms before and the high was similar to cannabis for me. I'm not a spiritual person at all and maybe that is why I didn't really care for it. I can imagine psilocybin helping a person in general from the effects but I just don't understand why someone would link it to spiritual unless they were deluded.

Re: Psilocybin Produced in Yeast

#194

Post by samatman » Mon, Apr 20, 2020, 8:07 PM UTC

KarlKemp wrote: post #54

samatman wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does say that. It's wrong, what it says, but it definitely says it.

Is there any pure psilocybin being sold? My (entirely pop-culture based) impression is that "white powder" and similar processed substances of high purity are the dominant form for almost all drugs. Cocaine isn't sold as leaves, nor can you buy dried poppies. Marijuana is an exception because it easier to smoke in its more natural state and, let's face it, because its users are hippies beholden to the naturalistic fa…

Not to detract from your point, but there was a lovely, decade-long period where coca tea leaf, packaged in tea bags, was readily available online, including from Amazon.

I miss that, because I have no interest in cocaine powder whatsoever, but coca tea is a nice change of pace from caffeine-based natural stimulants.

With respect to psilo(cy)bin, there's a product one can find sometimes called 'tootsie roll', which is a concentrate of the alkaloids mixed with chocolate and other confectionary ingredients. A simple alcohol extraction will do the trick, and ordinary acid-base workup can get whatever degree of purity is desired.

The phosphoryl group is somewhat delicate, which means what you end up with using acid-base is mostly psilocin. But no one actually cares about that ;)

Re: Psilocybin Produced in Yeast

#195

Post by azernik » Mon, Apr 20, 2020, 8:51 PM UTC

plurinshael wrote: post #178

azernik wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if something heals you, is it not sacred? And likewise, if something is sacred, it heals you. Let me explain in two different ways why this is wrong. First, because we are after all a site full of programmers, let me put this in terms of prepositional logic: A => B is different from B => A. If I tell you "all doctors are humans" (let's assume this is true, for the sake of the example), accepting that proposition do…

I appreciate the effort you've put in to "refute" me, but I do not think that you've actually put much thought into it. I'm aware of how logic works, I have a degree in mathematics. I did not intend to use A=>B as a reason that B=>A; I was using both as self-evidential statements. I'm talking about a completely different premise / system of thinking about medicine that I learned from several Indian / Native American…

> I was using both as self-evidential statements.

They are not.

> I'm talking about a completely different premise / system of thinking about medicine that I learned from several Indian / Native American tribal attitudes.

This is the whitest sentence I have ever read on this website. And it's a very white website.

> I don't think "sacred medicine" means "You can use however much of this substance in whatever fashion you choose and always have positive results." There are additional rules, guidelines, and best practices to consider, always. But if something brings you connection, warmth, healing, new awareness, humility, love for others, rapport with the Earth, insight into your life, etc, then we generally call that "sacred", and we also call it "medicine", even if the thing in question is just having a conversation, watching a dog play in the sunshine, or smelling the scents on the breeze. Sacred medicine.

Okay. And what are those rules, guidelines, and best practices for magic mushrooms? Because let me tell you, most people's experience of grabbing a shroom or two and eating them does not come with the kinds of structure you see in, say, ayahuasca practices.

You're acting like the preliminary scientific results - of improvement in mental health - come from following a centuries-long native tradition. They don't. They come from the haphazard practices of white California hippies over the last 80 years or so.

> I find this silly. Of course you can have too much of a good thing, or use a good thing in a way that is ignorant of the larger system around it and end up doing harm. But are you sure you're not really trying to "refute" the existence of the spiritual, or of the sacred?

I'm not trying to refute the existence of the spiritual. I'm trying to refute your very specific loading in this thread of a wide variety of psilocybin practices, mostly arrived at for convenience in the last several decades, with sacredness and with traditional imprimatur.

Re: Psilocybin Produced in Yeast

#196

Post by ralusek » Mon, Apr 20, 2020, 9:01 PM UTC

pharke wrote: post #140

ralusek wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The microscope was a tool for observing a new layer of objective, real, reproducible phenomenon within a previously inaccessible layer of our universe. Now, considering the conversation we're having, feel free to take "objective and real" with a grain of salt, but what I mean is that they are internally consistent, verifiable, reproducible, etc. Psychedelics have so far proven to be capable of temporarily rewiring ou…

My point was not about the validity of psychedelic experiences. It was about the fact that we have outright banned all avenues of research into these alterations in consciousness so we can't even find out if there are reproducible effects across individuals. If you did care about scientific inquiry and reproducibility then you would also be against these absurd restrictions. Because of this self-imposed ignorance we'…

How is describing our brains as "consciousness computers" inaccurate? Our brains have so many analogous components to computers. Both have working memory, long term memory, both have processors proficient in either linear or parallel processing, and the way our neurons interact formed the basis for neutral networks in software.

You also seem to think that I believe it's a good thing that psychedelics are illegal, when I have explicitly said otherwise. I think people should be able to do with their body as they wish, and research into the effects could produce some utility. But what you're talking about here, having psychedelics help "treat a variety of psychological afflictions," isn't what I would consider to be pushing frontiers forwards further and faster than space exploration, although that's ultimately a matter of preference.

Re: Psilocybin Produced in Yeast

#197

Post by mikeg8 » Mon, Apr 20, 2020, 9:02 PM UTC

tomphoolery wrote: post #180

mikeg8 wrote: post #5

> "It's unfeasible and way too expensive to extract psilocybin from magic mushrooms and the best chemical synthesis methods require expensive and difficult to source starting substrates...” This is one of those situations where I feel like we (humans) are approaching it all wrong. Why over complicate it by trying to “extract” the psilocybin instead of treating it like marijuana and growing the mushrooms in highly con…

Nature didn't give psilocybin to us as a "gift" in order to help us figure out the world. Just like everything else that can be used and consumed by humans, we co-opted this organism for our own purposes. Psilocybin was evolved by these mushrooms as a defense mechanism against animals trying to eat it, just like every other psychoactive drug. It's a poison, not a medicine. We just so happened to be big enough and our…

First, my choice to use the word gift is exactly that - a personal choice. If I believe that psilocybin is a gift, what authority do you have to say I am wrong? You may feel differently, and I would respect that, without pretending I know better than you on how to interpret such things.

Second, you say, "It's a poison, not a medicine" while following with several points supporting the clear medicinal values of the chemical. There is no concrete evidence suggesting psilocybin is a defense mechanism. That's one of the fascinating things about mycology - we know very little. Many mycologists believe that psilocybin may actually be used to attract animals, not repel them. There are several studies about the connection between mycelium and plants as well as theories that the mushroom's fruits bring animals into an ecosystem to disturb/fertilize the surrounding flora, as well as possibly assist with the germination of trees/plants that the fungi depend on.

Humans do not have a monopoly on ingesting these mushrooms - goats have been known to seek out psilocybe cubensis and many different animals seek plants/chemicals that bring on altered states of consciousness. Check out "Stealing Fire" if your interested in learning more about this.

It seems you may know very little on mirco-dosing. Many mirco-dosers take a pill every 3-4 days. One of the basic principles is that you do not have any perception of the chemical so no negative side effects. It should not inhibit job performance in any way, if done properly. And much of the research suggest micro-dosing has lasting benefits when a user ends their micro-doing after ~8 weeks. Since you'd "sign up in a heart beat" and know how easy it is to find mushrooms, my question is why do you choose to continue supporting big pharma with daily SSIs? I think it could be argued that the cost/known negative side effects of SSIs outweigh the potential (not confirmed) negatives of a properly regimented 6-8 week micro-dosing experiment. Just my thoughts. I also look forward to the day when growing kits are easily available.

Re: Psilocybin Produced in Yeast

#198

Post by ebcode » Mon, Apr 20, 2020, 9:15 PM UTC

phkahler wrote: post #137

colechristensen wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are negative side effects from consuming the mushrooms which you don't get from purified psilocybin. Dosage is important. There isn't a way to test for potency which would ensure a reliable dose. Argument fallacies: * your anecdotal positive experiences * suggesting superiority because something is "from nature" * referring to "mistakes from the past" without naming any * suggesting superiority that "has been (…

The singular of data is not anecdote. This is a common common tactic used to reject people's personal experience.

The singular of data is "datum", for those out there wondering.

Re: Psilocybin Produced in Yeast

#199

Post by plurinshael » Mon, Apr 20, 2020, 9:53 PM UTC

azernik wrote: post #195

plurinshael wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the effort you've put in to "refute" me, but I do not think that you've actually put much thought into it. I'm aware of how logic works, I have a degree in mathematics. I did not intend to use A=>B as a reason that B=>A; I was using both as self-evidential statements. I'm talking about a completely different premise / system of thinking about medicine that I learned from several Indian / Native American…

> I was using both as self-evidential statements. They are not. > I'm talking about a completely different premise / system of thinking about medicine that I learned from several Indian / Native American tribal attitudes. This is the whitest sentence I have ever read on this website. And it's a very white website. > I don't think "sacred medicine" means "You can use however much of this substance in whatever fashion…

Hey have a nice day

Re: Psilocybin Produced in Yeast

#200

Post by mikeg8 » Mon, Apr 20, 2020, 10:09 PM UTC

robbrown451 wrote: post #189

mikeg8 wrote: post #5

> "It's unfeasible and way too expensive to extract psilocybin from magic mushrooms and the best chemical synthesis methods require expensive and difficult to source starting substrates...” This is one of those situations where I feel like we (humans) are approaching it all wrong. Why over complicate it by trying to “extract” the psilocybin instead of treating it like marijuana and growing the mushrooms in highly con…

I think you could make the same argument about.... everything? Farming and selective breeding vs. hunting and gathering? Inventing modern materials rather than using wood and stone and animal parts? Pretty much everything. "Mistakes from the past?" Which specific ones are you speaking of? I don't doubt there have been many, but if you are talking about choosing not to simply take things as nature gives them to us, we…

Some examples that come to mind are pesticides/herbicides/synthetic fertilizers. The farming example is very on-point actually. Production agriculture has become synonomous with monocultures (growing one species) to maximize "yield", and it's having devastating consequences. We're killing micro organisms in the soil, which are necessary for nutrient exchange to the crops. Modern vegetables have 50-80% less nutrients than those of 50 years ago. The lack of diversity in plant species means a single predator/pest will not have any natural repellents, thus requiring pesticides. The soils, losing nutrients rapidly, now require additives in the form of synthetic fertilizers: nitrogen, prosperous, and potassium. We took a system that worked, tried to over engineer it, and created a whole mess of problems and additonal work/cost.

Another: We took cows, which have a special organ called a rumen that is specifically designed to extract nutrients from grasses, an abundant resource that many animals cannot use as a food source, and instead began feeding them diets of corn. The corn heavy diets is worse for the cows overall immune system, requiring the addition of antibiotics. Farmers who raise cows in balance with their natural state of a grass based diet will need little to no antibiotics.

Wood is making a massive comeback in the commercial construction industry because we realized it has some properties that we were too willing to dismiss, including it's flexibility and amazing strength-to-weight in relation to it's cost to produce.

I'm not anti-technology or anti-innovation, but I think it's also important to ask ourselves whether all this extra work we create for ourselves is actually necessary/beneficial. In the case of psilocybin synthesis/extracts, I'm a bit skeptical. I think we're trying to re-invent the wheel.