Anyone heard about 2cB

?????

I Read That And I Didn't See LSD or Hoffman Mentioned Once.

pinkus said:

from the net stuff I can find about hoffman's trip it says you're right. But none of them are the original account.

I am very possibly wrong. here is some stuff I did find that relates to the idea that it is a naturally occurring substance.


http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi1037.htm


you are just as stoked about ALL psychedelics as I was before I was twenty five. I'm 45 now, and I'll probably only trip 1-4 times this year. pre-25 I was a weekly user. not better, not worse, just less focused on experimentation. Of course, I am preparing to extract some DMT pretty soon.... could just be fooling myself.

Click to expand...

Ganjaglutin said:

?????

I Read That And I Didn't See LSD or Hoffman Mentioned Once.

Click to expand...

it didn't. it's several paragraphs. the first one refers to me NOT finding the original account that i referred to. the second paragraph istarts with me stating I might be mistaken and gives s an example of something that is relatively common knowledge that would lead someone to believe that LSD is a naturally occurring substance.

as i mentioned in several posts. it doesn't really matter to me if it is or isn't naturally occurring.

i'll try to find the original reports. I read them from some of my mother's reference books when she was working in a treatment center and I was a budding psychonaut...oh 30 years ago. do i remember it incorrectly?, I couldn't tell you. I saw it posted last year on Bicycle Day~somewhere

Not a chemist~don't want to be. so i'll do the ones I can grow

I'm Just Confused That's All, Just Trying To Understand How You Came To Think It's Natural.

I was beginning to consider this a pain the ass, but just found it at DUH erowid. Now i'm happy i get to read it , right or wrong, so i won't start anymore turf wars with GG

http://www.psychedelic-library.org/child1.htm

LSD, My Problem Child

A Great Read For Anyone Interested In The Creation Of LSD.

Oh everday I find more and more joy perusing through these threads.... maybe because some people give some good information that I previously didn't know about or the fact that some people on here are talking out of their ass and their thoughts shoudl be locked in a safe dumped somewhere in the Pacific Ocean. To the person who thinks that synthetic chemcals should not be touched yet advocates mdma and lsd needs to reevaluate his information. Yes lsd and mdma has ties to natural compounds.. but yet is very much synthetic and other chemicals too have semi-natural as they resemble their relations to mdma. For instance, herion is synthetic opium... which is herion is derived from morphine... cant you see that all compounds have a tie whether they are natural or synthetic does not make them any much safer... their are things natural in society that are very unsafe- like Hell's bell's, amanita muscaria... I wouldn't just disregard a psychedelic because its synthetic... I would look at several factors: how it metabolizes in the body, way it interferes with physiological/psychological functions, and the efficacy of the experience. Please respond with any outstanding input!

fuk 2cb, i feel sick wheni do it... 2cI is cool 2cb is a unpure form of 2cI

2C-i FTW!!!

To DankantorNorcal:

how did you come up with the idea that 2cb is the unpure form of 2ci? That just sounds utterly ridiculous! First off, 2CB by standard is the concept in which all other 2c substances are described. 2cb basically serves as the gateway to all 2c analogues and when in comparison... 2cb is held as the erotic empathogen by many psychologistis. If sickness always occurs with 2cb then you might be allergic which does not make 2cb unpure due to your individual reaction. If you look back in history 2cb was the "legal ecstasy replacement" because of its close resembling qualities of mdma and not due to its bad physical components.