3 ms·

Related: gwern's study was pretty bad in a number of ways, most notably that it's unlikely the lsd was stored correctly, which will have a large effect on poten

by duaneb 11y ago

Related: gwern's study was pretty bad in a number of ways, most notably that it's unlikely the lsd was stored correctly, which will have a large effect on potency and make dosage much less meaningful as the test progresses. Furthermore, I think there's a lot to be said that the brain needs to be "trained" to make good uses of the drug, including microdoses—you might be able to recognize the effects better if you're already familiar with the doses at a strong level. However, this is completely spitballing. I'm eager to see proper medical/psychological testing with pharmacists maintaining dosage and administration.

gwern 11y ago
> Related: gwern's study was pretty bad in a number of ways, most notably that it's unlikely the lsd was stored correctly, which will have a large effect on potency and make dosage much less meaningful as the test progresses. It was stored fine. LSD will not self-destruct in days when stored in distilled water in a refrigerator. It will not even self-destruct after multiple decades in a jar. People store LSD in all sorts of forms for regular trips and it works fine, and somehow, people keep reporting positive microdose experiences regardless of how they sourced or stored their LSD...
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- duaneb 11y ago
  You were not in control of the drug before you took it. You have no idea what you took. the sample size is one (or arguably two). Are you saying that in spite of this, your experiment has any meaningful results? I have no idea why you're attempting to preserve the authenticity of your experiment when it had vanishingly few verifiable materials, effects, and samples. Your post has great value without attempting to draw results.