Talk:Psychedelic drug

message: Replaced with a more proper one: "A fractal pattern, similar in some respects to what may some people stereotipically associates with a psychedelic experience".
See discussion above for support on the modification. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 14:36, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture text modified 

message: Is the picture...relevant? The caption reads 'A fractal pattern, similar in some respects to what may be seen during a psychedelic experience' but without being an expert in psychiatry, it strikes me that pretty much anything 'may be seen during a psychedelic experience' 163.1.209.71 (talk) 15:23, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you, this picture seems to be totally useless. Why don't put a picture of a pink elephant instead? Some folks see pink elephants when high on drugs. Bah! Remove the picture. --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 14:33, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

text: I would agree that both kaleidoscopic and fractal patterns are a stereotypical visual effect of "psychedelic" drugs.  While not everyone experiences this, and those who do may not always (or even often) experience them, there is scientific evidence to support that this patterning is innate to how both the optical nerve system and visual cortex function.  Whether or not this system becomes over-stimulated, the brain itself becomes flooded with visual information, or a little of both is uncertain.  --Thoric (talk) 21:55, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

text: stereotypical: yes! --Δ Mr. Nighttime Δ (talk) 14:33, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Picture

message: Someone wrote:
"Many pharmacologists define psychedelic drugs solely as chemicals that have an LSD- or mescaline-like action, working on the serotonin 5-HT2A receptor in the brain."
I'm quite sure that's not true.  I'm sure enough that instead of putting a citation needed tag, I'm cutting it out and replacing it with something accurate.AlkaloidMan (talk) 08:05, 31 October 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The paper that has been linked doesn't define psychedelics at all. It merely mentions tryptamines and phenethylamines as "two major classes" of psychedelics, sharing the main action over the 5-ht2a receptor. Psychedelics is a broad term and like the article says, it can also be used to describe non-serotonergic drugs, such as salviorin a. The way it stands now, the definition isn't just wrong, the article is also contradicting itself by mentioning atypical psychedelics.--87.155.249.53 (talk) 16:07, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: Salvinorin A is most definitely not a psychedelic, and should not be described as such. Thoric (talk) 18:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition of "psychedlic" according to pharmacologists 

message: I added the following sentence to the end of the first paragraph:
"With a few exceptions, most psychedelic drugs fall into one of the two following families of chemical compounds; tryptamines [more specifically: alkylated tryptamines], and phenethylamines [more specifically: alkoxylated phenethylamines]."
I find this statement to be true; Cannabis & its psychoactive compounds (namely Δ9-THC, CBD, & CBN), as well as Salvia divinorum, are among the few exceptions... but almost all of the 200+ psychedelic compounds fall into one of those two categories.  Even LSD, despite technically being an ergoline compound, contains a tryptamine backbone (hence its 5-HT receptor agonist effects).
I also edited the following sentence within the first paragraph:
"The psychedelic experience is often compared to non-ordinary forms of consciousness such as trance, meditation, yoga, religious fervor, dreaming and even near-death experiences."
to...
"The psychedelic experience is often compared to non-ordinary forms of consciousness such as trance, meditation, yoga, religious ecstasy, dreaming and even near-death experiences."
...as the page religious fervor does not exist.  If anyone wishes to dispute this, please let me know.  I am aware that not all psychedelic-induced religious experiences are ecstatic, but I could not find an existing page which was a sufficient synonym for religious fervor, so I went with religious ecstasy.  If others insist, we can change it back, despite the page religious fervor being nonexistent... perhaps somebody could create one for it.
:(Psychonaut25 - 13355p34k / C0n7r1b5 12:35 AM EST, 21 May 2013 (UTC))
:: Why define drugs according to their chemical structure? That is rather old fashion. Today we usually define drugs according to which receptors they interact with. 5-HT 2A receptor agonists, NMDA receptor antagonists, κ-Opioid receptor agonists, and so on.Zanthius (talk) 13:38, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Edits to the First Paragraph (Tryptamines & Phenethylamines) 

message: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychoactive_drug
Should that article and this one be merged? Aren't they about the same thing?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.158.72.234 (talk) 05:14, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: A psychoactive drug is a drug which as an effect on the mind, while a psychedelic drug is a drug that has a psychedelic effect on the mind. All psychedelics are psychoactive drugs, but not all psychoactive drugs are psychedelic.Zanthius (talk) 13:35, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vs. Psychoactive?? 

message: I just made this illustration in latex. Maybe something like this should be on this webpage?
Zanthius (talk) 13:27, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Abuse potential vs toxicity for psychedelics 

message: The general psychological effects section should be removed (or reduced), because from having experience with different types of psychedelics (5HT2A receptor agonists, NMDA receptor antagonists and κ-Opioid receptor agonists) I think the experiences are very different. Maybe you should have a very small section describing the general criterias for defining a drug as a psychedelic (for example hallucinatory effects), but much more empathesis should be put on the psychological effects of different receptor interactions. I also think you could devide the general effects section into sections like "psychedelics and spirituality", "psychedelic act", "chemistry of psychedelics", "psychedelics and drug abuse", "possible adverse effects of psychedelics", and so on. And why hasn't this page been merged with the hallucinogens page? Zanthius (talk) 14:07, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: This page focuses on one section of the Hallucinogens page, which is broken down into psychedelic drug, dissociative drug and deliriant.  It may need expansion, but should not be merged.  Also, as dissociative drug has its own article, the dissociative drug section does not belong in the psychedelic drug article.  --Thoric (talk) 23:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Really? Because it is written about dissociative drugs on this webpage, but I think it is inaccurate to put κ-opioid receptor agonists and NMDA receptor antagonists into the same group (dissociatives). Rather you should use a 4 group system. 5H2A receptor agonists as psychedelics, NMDA receptor antagonists as dissociatives,  anticholinergics as deleriants, and κ-Opioid receptor agonists as dysphoriants. 84.210.54.80 (talk) 16:32, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

text: Salvia D. is considered to be more dissociative than a dysphoriant.  A substance does not have to be an NMDA antagonist to be a dissociative.  --Thoric (talk) 18:34, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: But the endogenous ligand for k-opioid receptors Dynorphin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynorphin), is considered to be mainly dysphoric.84.210.54.80 (talk) 21:25, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

text: By whom? Some people online do that, probably based on subjective effects. Dr Rick Strassman for example objected to lumping up salviorin A with dissociatives as it is very clearly not a NMDA-antagonist. Psychedelics on the other hand is a broader term and usually defined over subjective effects. Thus "atypical psychedelic" might very well make more sense than calling it a dissociative.--87.155.249.53 (talk) 16:14, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

text: The effects of salvinorin A are clearly described as dissociative, and plenty of other non-NMDA antagonists also have strong dissociative effects. Classical psychedelics are not primarily dissociative. Psychedelics and Dissociatives are at two opposite ends of a spectrum of effect, and while they do meet in the middle, we should not use the terms interchangeably. Psychedelics are "consciousness expanding", and dissociatives are "consciousness focusing". This is why dissociatives are useful for anesthesia, and psychedelics are not, and can interfere with anesthesia. Salvinorin A has actually had research in use (in combination with other substances) in General Anesthesia. Please see: https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2019197594 Thoric (talk) 18:24, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  This webpage is very badly organized, and should be expanded or merged with the hallucinogens page. 

message: This article seems to be quite off-date and a bit misleading. Tryptamines like LSD, psilocybin and DMT bind at many different receptors at different strength. I've read of activity at D1, A2A, A2B, A2C, and tryptamines tend to also bind to many different serotonin receptors. For example psilocin and mescaline bind strongly to 5ht2b, but psilocin is only moderately active at 5ht2a and mescaline not at all. Or so my notes say, but I don't have a reliable source available. Just a heads up if anyone is paying attention.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.222.148.189 (talk) 21:10, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  5-hydroxytryptamine receptor antagonism 

message: The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:
* 
Participate in the deletion discussion at the . —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:22, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion 

message: — Assignment last updated by Kph7917 (talk) 17:44, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Research Process and Methodology - SP24 - Sect 201 - Thu