or am i wrong? my uncle was telling me that when he used to trip acid was his favorite..but that he wouldn't eat it anymore because it isn't as good as it used to be. i tried to explain to him that acid is just acid..a molecule...and that what he was describing had more to do with micrograms and purity of the crystals...but he shut his ears off just like everyone else when i start to talk about things i care about and wouldn't hear it. am i misguided on this one?
There are some analogues of acid, such as ALD-52 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ALD-52) that are structurally different & have slightly different effects. So its possible that he was taking a different molecule while thinking it was LSD, which would then validate his argument. But, yeah, LSD is lysergic acid, a chemical, so there is no difference, if its the same chemical, between LSD made now & LSD made a few decades ago. & I'd put money on this being the case. Plus, if he hasn't tripped on the new LSD, how is he able to know that its different? I'd chalk your uncle's opinion up to goodolefashioned rumors. Or maybe he just means it wouldn't be as good now that there isn't as supportive an environment for him to take it in? Who knows? I didn't talk to the guy.
No your not. The only thing I have seen about differences in LSD is many of the early users, Leary, Alpert, and others at the time have said that there was a different quality to the experience from LSD made by Sandoz and LSD made by underground labs. Not that the underground labs were/are producing crap, just that there was something special about LSD manufactured by Sandoz labs. I have never noticed much difference from LSD I got in the seventies to LSD available today except the strength of doses has dropped. I wish I had been lucky enough to have gotten some Sandoz LSD.
I ate my first hit in 1979 and it doesnt seem much different that the stuff today, just not as strong now. I have had the same conversation with people older than me who said the same shit. I think alot of it has to do with a "things are better then than now" mentality. I have done all kind of doses and it seems to me the only difference is the strength, but thats just me. LSD effects people differently but I say its more or less the same.
I feel like I keep posting links to other pages lately....obviously I never tried Sandoz acid, but here's a report of some people who did: http://www.erowid.org/chemicals/lsd/lsd_article2.shtml I do know that set and setting can make two trips completely different from two pieces of blotter right next to each other. My expectations would be different if I was taking acid from a sandoz vial, and my guess is that Leary is not immune even though he may have coined the terms "set and setting." When you are taking as much acid at Leary was, a lot of things seem magical and mystical....and they are....but that's different than looking at things from a scientific perspective. Sandoz acid is very special, but I don't think it's scientifically different.
thanks everyone. yeah that's generally what i was thinking..though i hadn't considered him having tried any analogues of lsd. another thing i had considered was that you can never recreate a trip and that may have been a reason. would be nice if you could though..i've had some really therapeutic trips that sent me back to the ground with some really great insight.
Do you think it could have just been due to the fact that it was an extremely clean synth? I mean, Sandoz must have had tons of legit lab equipment, and reagants in stock and stuff.
That article seems really sketchy, and as it stands now, not at all scientific. Which doesn't mean it's false, but I was expecting more substance. "Try this" isn't the most reliable or accurate way to test for degradation, IMO.
Yeah...I hear you. Also, it kind of contradicts my point that expectations would make it more special, which I'm sure it would. You'd need a huge double blind study with street acid vs sandoz. I'd be the first participant to sign up.
