This is an old but good topic. It has been discussed before but with new synthetic drugs being banned every year I wonder if this is good or bad? I certainly have had some fantastic journeys on LSD and MDMA but they seem to lack the personality that a natural ethneogen has( aya, shrooms, etc.) Not that I can't have a bad trip on LSD ( had a bad one on miprocin) but it seems that I have more consistent "fun" on synthetics but the natural substances seem to be more of a struggle but I gain a greater insight and lesson from the experience.

I'm not sure where everyone weighs in on this. Are synthetics ok as long as they are made with the exact same molecular structure as a natural compound? Is it ok to try and perfect a substance so there is no to little additional side effects( nausea, puking, headaches, sweating etc?) Of course there are some bad synthetics out there and personally I think some have no responsible use. As far as psychedelics go I would say any synthetic cannabinoid and most RCs that are labeled as LSD alternatives( 25i, possibly the 2cb family. Sasha would be mad.)

I'm just not sure how these two types of substances fall into place and I have had decent experience with both and a good amount of research into both. I just don't know yet. Any new ideas?

Synthetic? Natural? Or both?

I will always prefer natural over synthetic. That being said, I see no issue with synthetic drugs so long as they are done responsibly and made responsibly. I used to use synthetic cannibinoids or "herbal incenses" (as they were called in head shops and online) very regularly and honestly, I do prefer the high they give you over weed. The only thing that makes me prefer the real deal over them is the feeling that you are smoking poison when you smoke the lab made stuff. As long as you practice moderation and responsibility, you'll be fine.

Yea I guess. But synthetic cannabinoids always came with a warning of " only take a small to medium hit of this. Then some were you can smoke it like marijuana. And one time( first time) I took a big hit of the wrong kind of stuff. Stupidly I was driving and almost got myself and good friend killed. Not like anybody hasn't killed themselves on natural substances but synthetics just seem to have an edge to them. Not sure if it's all mental for me. Anybody else feel this?

I always smoked the synthetic stuff hit by hit. It never took me much for things to get really weird on that stuff. I know some people were ignorantly facing blunts of it like it was weed and then talking about how dangerous the stuff is because they had a seizure or something. Ruined it for everyone. Moderation is key. And yeah I agree that synthetics always seem a little more drastic/extreme.

Some synthetic 'cannabinoids' (actually an indole) like JWH-018 for example have been shown to be full agonists to the CB receptors. THC for example is what's known as a partial agonist. This mechanism acts as a natural threshold, and because of this, there is no real limit to how much these types of synthetics will affect you. This is why there are reports of death by cardiac arrest from these compounds. They also exhibit none of the numerous medicinal effects from real cannabinoids. Not to mention there have been no human studies on these drugs what-so-ever. I think the choice is clear.

LSD may be synthetic but LD50-wise it is one of the most non-toxic compounds known to man and has a history in medicine and psychotherapy.

You are right hopefull, that was incredibly stupid and irresponsible. I sincerely hope you learned your lesson from that and never ever do it again. Putting your life and everyone else's life around you in jeopardy just because you wanted to do an experimental drug is borderline retarded.

Oh I agree that the synthetic stuff is dangerous. I flirted with that danger on many occasions. I am not sure if the stuff does everyone the way it does me, but the synthetic cannabinoids really tripped me out. I mean full OEV trips. The entire world would move frame by frame at times. Everything would have big, bold cartoony outlines and sometimes the entire world would look like claymation. Depth perception was impossible. Close your eyes in one room of the house and when you open them you have somehow traveled to the garage. Insane appetitee Hysteria. Everything funny for no reason at all. Sometimes my cheeks would hurt from laughing so much. Ridiculous thoughts that made no sense once the experience was over. I saw many people get overrun by the stuff. I had one particular blend that was so intense that I would not let people smoke it unless they were experienced with the effects as I had a girl freak out and have a insane laughing while crying episode. Definitely not healthy or completely safe. That is why I stopped smoking it so regularly.

Several compounds, including DMT, were first synthesized before they were even found to be naturally occurring. Diazepam has been found in potatoes, oxycodone has been found in Epipactis helleborine orchid, tramadol has been found in Nauclea latifolia, etc.. There was even an Acacia found with methamphetamine, though that study has been put into question.

Who´s to say there isn´t an LSD tree for example? Or any other compound really..

There are natural poisons and safe synthetic substances. Synthetic vs natural is not a good indicator for safety or potential benefits of a substance.

That being said, the substances I´m most interested in are from natural sources, (mescaline cactus, ayahuasca, mushrooms, cannabis). Though to a lesser degree I also like synthetic LSD, have found some benefit in MDMA if used very rarely, and did not like bufotenine and neither LSA-containing seeds.

My thoughts exactly. It does seem that natural products tend to be safer and less intense than synthetics but this, of course, is not always the case. Like I said before, moderation is key. If you find yourself unable to control the substance, then whether it is natural or synthetic is of no consequence.

I prefer natural products, but that doesn't mean I like the effects of all natural products.
Some people (my wife) don't like caffeine.

Can't be more agree, the first psychedelic I tried was Psilocybe Semilanceata, and I didn't encounter LSD and such many years later, and noticed that LSD was a pure balanced love drug compared to Natural organic psychedelics.

I don't get how people can bad trip on a stable drug such as LSD if you take a decent dose and are in good hands, of course It's possible to flip over on any drug, but then you either have a weak mind ore your moderation is way to much to handle. (many factors here) Anyway, after all the deep trips on mushroom you kinda build your self a strong mind in the psychedelic world and know how to behave later if you encounter other psychedelic drugs IMO. Slap me if I'm wrong.

I don't think it is so black and white (natural v. synthetic). Sort of like endless suggested. Personally, I generally prefer naturally occurring psychedelics to man-made. But this is not set in stone, and it is primarily because the natural ones have been used for such a long time and have a good safety profile. But there are a few novel psychoactives that I am interested in, primarily psilocin and mescaline analogues, but I am very cautious about compounds with an unknown LD50 or unknown long-term effects.

I think a lot of people take the "natural entheogens only" stance very seriously, but there is still some grey-area. Take 4-AcO-DMT for example. It is a man-made compound with a very limited history of human use. But it is theorized to be a prodrug of psilocin, meaning it may be metabolized in the body into psilocin before it reaches the brain. So if the two might theoretically produce the same experience, why would one be superior to the other? I'm not trying to denounce anyone's beliefs or anything, and I have never personally experienced 4-AcO-DMT so I don't know if it does in fact produce the same effects, I'm just sharing some food for thought.

So I guess when it comes to psychedelics, my stance is: mostly natural, with some exceptions when they have been proven to be relatively safe.

Etheogenerator: I get what your saying about how they should be theoretically the same experience. But I remember reading an interview of Dennis Mckenna and he was talking about how some guy in Europe made synthetic ayahuasca. But Dennis had almost no interest in it because he said it lacked the purge quality of natural aya. So is there a perfect balanced chemical make up in natural substances that you miss out on when just taking the single most psychoactive compound in it or with a compound not
yet found in the plant kingdom?

I'll try to find that interview with Dennis

The guy was Jordi Riba from Spain and was freeze drying aya but Dennis mentions synthetics as well

http://www.nailedmagazin...s-mckenna-by-zoe-helene/

My favourite two are DMT and ye olde cannabis. I'm not saying natural is better than synthetic, but DMT is clearly greater in every desirable aspect than any synthetic psychedelic. And no synthetic cannabinoid (be it JWH-X, AM-X, 5-F-whatever, AKB-shibbidy bee or UR-14-Skip skap skibbidy bap) comes at all close to the real deal.

These may be just opinions but who even disagrees? I mean we can take it outside if you wanna go.

I'm locking this thread since this topic has been chewed ad nausea.

As has been pointed out so many times in the past: Artificial lines between 'synthetic ' and natural makes no sense, at all. Just lookup the many threads to learn why.


Kind regards,

The Traveler