It's also got a really unique looking chemical structure.
Guess I’ll stick with LSD
100% chance some people would use that recreationally if it were more freely available than the alternatives.
But, the primary non-indigenous use (and I suspect some of the intended commercial use) is in fact medical: it is useful for treating addictions.
But, to me "recreational" implies a party drug or a casual-use one. I don't see ibogaine as easily meeting either use. Why would you want to take a form of LSD that requires flying to Gabon and might kill you? There are much cheaper and less stressful ways to engage in drug tourism.
The lack of cartels are perhaps a reflection of the lack of the international supply chains etc. associated with drugs like cocaine and heroin?
No. Most of Europe (apart from Scandinavian states, Belarus and Russian Federation, I believe) has access to legal LSD prodrugs. Not analogs but a LSD-25 molecule with attached [it changes] something group which is detached after ingestion, making the ingested substance "the real thing". These do not pass the LSD/DMT Ehrlich test[0]. AFAIK citizens of at least a few US states can as well fully legally obtain such compounds from up north.
So no - lack of LSD cartels is not a result of the lack of international supply chains. As GP stated - it's because these substances have a very low addiction potential.
Well, they've had oil for the past 60 years. They have experience.
> That flowering tree is available in greater quantities in Ghana and Mexico, which "can produce ibogaine at unbeatable prices," said Guignon.
> And "Gabonese traditional knowledge is not protected by intellectual property regulations."
I don’t see why they’d be invaded, I think more likely they’ll be out-competed.
But the problem with drug talk is that it is often no middle ground. On the one hand, authorities are going to tell you that any psychoactive substance stronger than coffee will kill you just by looking at it. I understand their position, discouraging people from taking drugs outside of a medical settings is a good idea in general, it includes most kinds of self-medication. But in the process, they generalize and overstate the potential harm, as if every drug was fentanyl.
But on the other hand, you have people who minimize the risks, saying how great these are and how evil government is preventing these miracle cures because big pharma profits or whatever.
The truth is between the two, there are real risks with drugs like ibogaine, dmt, and even cannabis. And there is a good chance taking these will make your life worse overall. But they also can make your life better, or they can be a fun trip. I put these in the category of "probably not good for you, but life would be boring if you never took risks and only did things that are good for you". The problem is that it is hard to find information from that perspective, you basically have to do you own research, with all that implies.
Just administering the plant may be helpful but likely lacks an important component.
Medicine rooted in lineage and mastery is not possible to commercialize. One cannot buy “sacred”.
Obscuritan nonsense.
You are describing conventional medical science, the difference being that scientific knowledge is systematized and reproducible while traditional knowledge is not. It’s magical voodoo thinking used by witch doctors who don’t want their processes appropriated (or worse, invalidated) by medical science, exactly like chiropractic or Traditional Chinese “Medicine.”
I know personally several people, many of whom hardcore atheists, who have had life-changing experiences taking part of those rituals and many have gone back or made it a regular occurrence. None of them ceased to be hardcore atheists.
Tested and iterated on through the years, and if your worldview allows for the concept of plant consciousness, consider that the steps may have been provided by its suggestion.
If one’s worldview is 100% materialistic, an encounter with some of these plants may change that.
jaoane•8mo ago
krustyburger•8mo ago