how is it? Like coke its fun for a bit, but is really dumb, addicting and expensive. Although the effects are nothing alike. K is like alcohol at small doses, an opiate at medium doses, and pretty bizzarre (a little similar to salvia) at high doses.
Well all I said was "the human body doesn't manufacture psilocybin and you said WRONG. How else do you interpret that lol? As far as you asserting psychedelics are similar to mental disorders, let me ask you, are you schizophrenic? You're pointlessly making this more ambigious than it really is. Is a porcupine's quills "intended" for protection? Well, we can pretend everything is only relative so we can't say for sure, but on the other hand, it's pretty damn likely. All I said was "intended" not "intended by whom".
Yeah that's a good point, I claimed dissassociatives were closer to schizophrenia cause I had a diagnosed schizoaffective break. Its nothing like psychedelics really. I would say its hard to compare with any drug, probably because you're not having your brain chemistry being flooded with activity like a drug, but if I had to compare closer to dissassociatives.
usually people say that psychedelics are bad for those with mental disorders. Well...I am a diagnosed schizoaffective actually... and when I did acid, it seemed to patch things up a bit. The symptoms didn't really stop, but the resentment and depression of the manic depressive part eased up a lot.
My point is this, we cannot definitively say why exactly these compounds exist in mushrooms. Secondary metabolites are organic compounds that are not directly involved in the normal growth, development, or reproduction of organisms. Unlike primary metabolites, absence of secondary metabolites does not result in immediate death, but rather in long-term impairment of the organism's survivability, fecundity, or aesthetics, or perhaps in no significant change at all. Secondary metabolites are often restricted to a narrow set of species within a phylogenetic group. I make a specific point of this issue as I have discussed it with Joseph Amirati, professor of mycology, university of Washington.
Nope sure can't. What we can do is say one explanation is more likely than another though. So far, I've only seen one explanation, and to me it seems to be the most likely. In other words, it's a pretty big "or".
A significant or. And that or is another explanation. It plays no significant role. I would point out that in humans at least, any deleterious effects are dose related and the amount present from individual to individual varies greatly. Some mushrooms have such insignificant amounts that it takes large quantities to produce any effect all. If it is a defense mechanism, it is a poorly devised one.
If that was true then it would never have existed in them. Well, we ARE talking about fungi here. "Large quantities" is their strong suit.
Thanks for ending the conversation. It's absolutely gorgeous outside, I'm about to go deep into the forest with my notebook to write and suddenly realized that I don't really care what purpose psilocybin might have in mushrooms.
psilocybin and psilocin's purpose is for us to be able to communicate with the zeta reticulian. If you have not communicated with them you are not using the mushrooms correctly. ///
mushrooms are probably all like "oh no here comes another one of those pink apes, all they do is eat us and act weird, what's their problem" maybe psilocybin et al in fungi is as far removed from any defense mechanism as some common compound found in us, aka serotonin or something. it just coincidentally interfaces with our neural circuitry. maybe we can conceive of beings who's neural circuitries are interfaced by other molecules, like H2O or O2.
I've considered it, but can't fathom any use a mushroom might have for psilocybin. Other than to keep things from eating it that is.
Vitamins are organic compounds made by combining elements on the periodic table. Most necessary vitamins cannot be naturally produced by an organism. Vegetables don't produce vitamins, they absorb them from the ground for their own benefit, so no, vitamin A is obviously not a defensive mechanism.