I'm glad to hear this. The deceit isn't on the part of Gaiana and other vendors.
But was this deceit by those who supplied "Black Caapi" to these webshops? Or ignorance?

I find it hard to believe this was the product of ignorance, but I'm glad the online vendors
(or at least Gaiana so far) have righted this wrong so fast. It's a sign of good will.

^^

These vendors openly admitted that they themselves labled the vine as 'black banisteriopsis caapi" when they knew it was alicia. Whatever the supplier told them is irrelevant. I got it from their own mouths that they knew what they were selling was NOT banisteriopsis.

Gaiana is as much to blame as anyone for their role in this.

It is good though that they chose to lable them correctly now and exchange the vine for what people really paid for. It shows that at least they are willing to take responsibility.

According to what the vendor I asked said, and in regards to them (not gaiana, but mh-uk dot net, the same vendor 3rdI is talking about) this might not be the case.

They said their wholesaler referred to the product as "black ayahuasca". If this is so, they might have decided ayahuasca = B. Caapi, not considering that the term "ayahuasca" in origin seems to refer to different botanicals rather than to a single plant species. That made them uninformed and wrong - but not necessarily trying to deceive customers.

We could object about a couple assertions made in the link I shared above (specially regarding MAOI properties, for all we know) but they replied to the query and replaced "Banisteriopsis Caapi" with "Alicia Anisopetala". I say fair enough. If we had to ask much more than this, no vendor would be free from misleading information.

I don't know about the case of gaiana.

My message about a viable seed source was deleted?

This is not the place for your normal vendor talk.


Kind regards,

The Traveler