This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
DePiep ( talk · contribs) removed the word "abbreviated" claiming LSD is not an abbreviation for Lysergic acid diethylamide. [1]. Editor left editing note: "(not an abbr, and no reading disruption eithe by rm that)" which is partially incomprehensible. I reverted on the strength of Dictionary definition, [2] which cites "LB" as abbreviation for pound. Contrary to WP:BRD, editor re-reverted. [3]. I invite editor here to explain and discuss. Grammar'sLittleHelper ( talk) 22:51, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
this is to me very much of a "the sky is blue" thing. technically LSD is an acronym. Loosely speaking, the term abbreviation can encompass acronyms. We don't need a source to call the sky blue, and it is not OR to call the sky blue. The original argument above was, to be frank, stupid. LSD is not an abbreviation nor an acronym for "Lysergic Acid Diethylamide" - Sfarney was just being a robot without understanding what was actually going on, and I reckon that Depiep knew what was going on and was just messing with Sfarney. In the proposed text nobody wins the stupid argument and importantly the content makes absolute sense. Jytdog ( talk) 17:38, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
This is a "the sky is blue" thing. technically LSD is an acronym. Loosely speaking, the term abbreviation can encompass acronyms. We don't need a source to call the sky blue, and it is not OR to call the sky blue.Please be patient and wait for DePiep and Tryptofish to weigh in on the current version, and anybody else who cares. There is no deadline here and nothing to "win". We just need to find content that is good enough for everyone to live with. Jytdog ( talk) 20:56, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Please be patient. There is no deadline. Jytdog ( talk) 21:54, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Why the abrupt edit summary "the intention of the "who" tag was not to provide anecdotes or gossip" with no further explanation for the removal of sourced material? This seems rather noncollegial.
I am curious why the editor who has placed numerous tags of various sorts on the article isn't himself addressing the problems that concern him. This overtagging defaces the article, when a couple of tags at the pertinent headings would do the job. He could note the particular instances that bother him here on the talk page and invite a discussion that would more likely result in improving the article than would those unsightly tags that seem to linger for years at so many articles on Wikipedia. Tag bombing interrupts the text's flow for the reader, and places an unfair burden on other editors. Carlstak ( talk) 19:38, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
The Psychological Effects subsection is not a pharmacological text in its present form. It reads as an informal exposition describing the psychological effects of LSD in layman's terms rather than as a formal explication of those effects relative to the drug's pharmacology. The edits I made that were subsequently reverted were appropriate to the style of the section as it is written, and as germane to it as the Sam Harris reference with its anecdotal quote. If a strict MEDMOS regime is going to be enforced, the section should be rewritten, and the regime applied consistently to all refs. Granted that the results of psychological testing and even of controlled studies on human psychological responses to LSD can't have the rigor of physiological studies or be interpreted with the same unambiguity, but the psychological effects are far more significant than the physical effects. Much of the research was done before LSD was made illegal in the US (researchers were already feeling the heat from the FDA by 1966); I wouldn't think the literature produced by that research is reliable, especially considering the often freewheeling and not always disciplined approach of the scientists, who were sometimes administering the drug to themselves as well as their subjects. Carlstak ( talk) 04:32, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
I was referring to MDMA#Effects. I imagine the only thing involved in determining desired drug effect is simply asking a bunch of regular users of a particular recreational drug about why they take it. Not particularly complicated IMO. Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 19:54, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
@ Jytdog: I believe PNAS is a proper peer-reviewed journal [13] and your revert was in error. Please re-re. Grammar's Li'l Helper 18:15, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
In my opinion, the article is full of useful information, but in its present form is also a confusing, disjointed, unevenly written mish-mash in need of reorganization, if not a complete rewrite. For example: it would be helpful to the reader for the "Effects" section to be explicated before the barren "Uses" section. I imagine most lay readers, if they even make it that far, would rather read the "History" section before the abstruse and technical "Pharmacology" section. Also, one would expect more precise language than "ingesting vast amounts of LSD" in the "Overdose" section; meaningless or POV phrases like "a sense that one's thoughts are spiraling into themselves" or "dazzling and wildly inventive" don't belong in the article; and what the hell is a "psychedelic life style"? The "Forms" subsection says "More than 200 types of LSD tablets have been encountered since 1969 and more than 350 blotter paper designs have been observed since 1975." The source given for this information says "More than 200 types of LSD tablets have been identified since 1969", and "Since 1975 more than 350 paper designs have been classified" but neither it nor the article says by whom. I could personally vouch for at least 100 of the paper designs, but I don't think my say-so would count.;-)
Finally, there are still 7 "citation needed' tags on the article, but as is usually the case on Wikipedia, the citation police have shown little interest in finding the needed cites. Carlstak ( talk) 16:03, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Cited source for this statement in first paragraph is a 404. Secondary reference links are working. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cow trix ( talk • contribs) 10:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:05, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Can we please use a common measurement (micrograms) for all weight references? Confusing and disjointed to use both grams and micrograms — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.253.60.5 ( talk) 22:25, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Is there anything worth salvaging in that article? I think it should otherwise be redirected here; it looks to be mostly garbage. Sizeofint ( talk) 02:36, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
This article is really shit, I tried to read it but I couldn't figure out what was going on at all. I'm laughing at how terrible this is. Cheers.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:16, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
The source provided for the overdose section of this article is the following URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1129381/
"Eight patients were seen within 15 minutes of intranasal self-administration of large amounts of pure D-lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) tartrate powder." The overdose section of this article makes no mention that the fatal 1,000 to 7,000ug doses were administrated intranasally. It should be noted that this is an incredibly uncommon method of administration for LSD, as LSD is normally taken orally and that from my research at least I cannot find a single source that shows when administered orally LSD is fatal in doses above 1,000ug. In fact, I cannot find a single recorded case of any dosage at all being administered orally resulting in a fatality. There are even anecdotal reports of people taking doses that are an order of magnitude higher than what is described here, as high as 30,000 micrograms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shrimp4074 ( talk • contribs) 21:19, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
You can not overdose on LSD because I have seen guys do like 15 tabs of LSD at once & he was just fine & is still alive to day Skrodow ( talk) 22:29, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
I have never heard either of any case of oral overdose outside of those contrived conditions of the labs above deliberately doing so to put their human guinea pigs at risk. The article should reflect this along with the contrived and pointless nature of both the research and the article section. Mattjs ( talk)
But you have just clued me to the symptoms diagram of the upper chest: Now indeed I suspect that these symptoms may be associated only with the contrived lab overdoses above and not normal usage and dosage. If so then the diagram and related pieces of the article will have to be correctly cited/referenced or else these things WILL be removed. It seems to me that there may well be serious un-scientific anti-drug POV creeping into this article and over-stating its case by using the technique of baffling the common reader with bullshit to do so. 121.44.104.240 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:22, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Pseudohallucinations are not a effect of psychedelics nor does the source have any mention of "pseudohallucinations". This should be fixed because the drug has no correlation to the definition of the word. A more accurate phrase would just be "internal and external hallucinations", as this is exactly what happens, nothing is "pseudo" about psychedelics and nothing on them seem unreal. Whoever wrote that might feel that you can see unicorns on LSD but that's not the case, one should research the effects of the substance before writing about its effects on the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.185.156.165 ( talk) 04:28, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
This should say stimulating. The trips aren't simulating anything.
Done, thanks for the notice. Sizeofint ( talk) 08:46, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
In the first sentence after the name the abbreviation for lysergic acid diethylamide is refered as LSD, but no mention that his stands for the german "Lysergsäurediäthylamid". One can find the german translation out by reading further, but I think this could be mentioned in the sake of completeness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loudvalley99 ( talk • contribs) 20:09, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add New section: Areas of the Brain affected by LSD Lysergic Acid Diethylamid (LSD) is a serotonergic hallucinogen which is actually better able to bind to serotonin receptors than serotonin itself. Once bound, LSD is able to decrease neuronal oscillations, especially in areas of densely expressed 5-HT2A receptors like the visual cortex, posterior cingulate cortex, the parahippocampus, the retionsplenial cortex, and various other areas of the default mode network. One of the most well-known effects of LSD has on the brain are its marked influence on the visual cortex resulting in visual hallucinations. A study performed in March 2016, modern neuroimaging was used to track the effects of LSD in the brain, using three complementary neuroimaging techniques: arterial spin labeling (ASL), blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) measures, and magnetoencephalography (MEG), during resting state conditions [1] to compare brain activity between resting “normal” brain activity and activity after LSD was administered. This study was able to identify the areas of the brain with increased and decreased activity which correlate with and would contribute to the hallucinations.
The study was performed under eyes-closed, task free, resting conditions. In these conditions there should be little to no activity in the visual cortex(V1) and during this time however the scans showed increased activity in the V1 including increased blood flow, “these increases correlated positively with ratings of complex imagery”
[2]. Also observed in the V1 were increases in the resting state functional connectivity (RSFC) and decreases in alpha power. Alpha wavescause a “functional inhibition of task irrelevant areas”
[3]. For example, when performing a visual task alpha power would decrease in the V1 allowing it to function while the alpha power might increase in other areas like the auditory cortex. On LSD, the decrease in the alpha wave inhibitor allows for increases in connectivity or desegregation of different brain regions which allows other senses like touch and sound to contribute to the visual experience, this is referred to as synesthesia, where a person is able to “see” smells or sounds. Another study which focused on ayahuasca hallucinations, used fMRI scans to compare eye-open conditions against eyes-closed conditions after the consumption of ayahuasca and found, Cite error: A <ref>
tag is missing the closing </ref>
(see the
help page).. This could be contributed to by other areas of the brain which are also more active after the consumption of psychedelics. The scans also revealed Brodmann areas, which is part of the retrosplenial cortex, associated with episodic memory and contextual associations also were more active during these visual hallucinations which correlates to the desegregation of the V1 on LSD. The psychedelics cause the visual cortex to acts as though there is an external stimulus when in fact there is none. Under normal eye-open conditions you would expect to find increase CBF, decreased alpha power, and increased RSFC, which is instead what is observed in eyes-closed conditions of psychedelics, the visual cortex is essentially “seeing with eyes closed” and the desegregation between the Brodmann areas and the visual cortex allow increased communication of episodic memories including emotion to color the visual experience of the hallucinations (de Araujo et al., 2012).
References
Bri nichols ( talk) 21:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove "...in the conformational state of the drug..." Under Pharmacodynamics, please change "The diethylamide group of LSD forms a "lid" in the conformational state of the drug..." to "The extracellular loop 2 leucine 209 residue of the 5-HT2B receptor forms a 'lid' over LSD..." 152.23.168.53 ( talk) 19:20, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:15, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change link on glutamate to point to "gluatamate (neurotransmitter)" page. Nickfiacco ( talk) 21:19, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:27, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-9088.ZO.html%7D%7DWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:13, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved - consensus is clearly against the renaming of this article. DrStrauss talk 13:53, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Lysergic acid diethylamide →
LSD – The
common name for the substance is "LSD", not the scientific name.
Gaioa (
talk) 02:35, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia should use commonly used names for articles, even should the common name be formally incorrect. For instance,
Ringo Starr is not titled "Richard Starkey",
Chloroform is not titled "Trichloromethane", and so on. I say we rename it to simply "LSD" for clarification and ease-of-finding. Of course, the name itself,
[15], redirects here, so it's not a problem by itself. Only a formality of
WP:COMMONNAME. Also, there is nothing wrong with the rest of the article, and the intro of Lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), also known as acid, is...
is excellent, even more so with the title of "LSD". But rename it, I say. I would do it right away, but I don't wanna shock all you
drug- and
medication- writers without a second opinion.
Gaioa (
talk) 02:35, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Doc Ellis claimed to throw a no hitter on June 12, 1970. Djwedge ( talk) 09:04, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:04, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.telegrafo.com.ec/english-bulletin/item/ecuador-could-regulate-drug-sales.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
To conform to MOS:US, uses of U.S. should be changed to US as the article has other country abbreviations (viz. UK). Thanks, 142.161.81.20 ( talk) 00:50, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
"The Grateful Dead were inextricably linked to LSD in the United States, and Grateful Dead concerts provided the primary distribution network for LSD through the mid-1990s"
Maybe A primary network, but not the primary network. How would that even work? Professional drug dealers that tour around the country with the band selling LSD? (I'm sure they did, but I doubt that was a main source nationally speaking). What about places they rarely visited? You only got a chance to buy it once every so many years when the Dead came into the region? Midlevel suppliers had to travel to where-ever they were playing to stock up, and/or stock up when they were in town and hope the supply lasts until they return again? No other drug market works remotely like this, and I see no reason LSD would be different. Assuming each region had its own supply independent of GD concerts, I really doubt the amount sold at concerts outweighed the rest of the country's sources; depends on what you mean by primary. Largest single distribution route, perhaps, but that's different. A lot of acid was sold at Dead concerts, and likely the regional supply and use rate increased for a while when the band visited a region, but tats about it. That doesn't make it the primary distribution network for LSD any more than saying discos were the primary resource for cocaine...and that would at least make some sense, since a disco doesn't move all over the country irregularly. And how can someone prove a claim like that anyway? AnnaGoFast ( talk) 12:34, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
The picture titled "Physical effects of LSD" seems unnecessary. Most of the effects listed in the picture are already mentioned in the text, and the ones that aren't should simply be added. I don't see a need for a picture showing the reader the location of the mouth, eyes, heart, etc. in a human body, as this is wp:Common knowledge. CodeTalker ( talk) 01:50, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
I completely agree. In addition the template for the picture was originally designed for things like alcohol that listed the chronic effects it has specifically highlighting all the organs that can fail. It's use to describe acute effects many of which are pretty benign. Now that you've pointed it out, when I got to the stupid use of a genetic template that actually told me nothing of any importance it distracted me from the content. It's been a week without any argument in support of its use so I'll remove it. If anyone felt strongly about it they are most welcome to defend its use. User:Methylated603 ( talk) 12:31 6 June 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Reference 36 is a dead link (already marked). The article being referenced is officially rehosted here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673610614626 DarkReviver ( talk) 12:09, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In "In the 1950s, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) beleived the drug might be useful for mind control so tested it on people, some without their knowledge, in a program called MK-Ultra", the word believed is misspelled as "beleived". Change "beleived" to "believed"! KrazIvan ( talk) 14:07, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
The Entheogenic Myth does not belong in a lexicon, and even here right next an absurd hallucination image. You should know better. (unsigned comment by 84.208.136.53)
There is a lot of sympathetic quotes related to LSD. Balancing the article with some of the other side would be healthy.
For instance. "In a culture where a lot of people just fake it, I think in the whole hippie times, Wendy Carlos (Switched On Bach) was the real acidmessiah. He turned gay. " - unknown.
His work is really LSD is GOD type stuff. While probably most other stuff is heroin. ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.136.53 ( talk) 11:48, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
A sentence in Section 8.2 Legal status - Czech Republic doesn't make logical sense. Replace this sentence:
Under the Regulation No. 467/2009 Coll, possession of more than 5 doses of LSD was to be considered smaller than large for the purposes of the Criminal Code and was to be treated as a misdemeanor subject to a fine equal to a parking ticket.
with corrected:
Under the Regulation No. 467/2009 Coll, possession of no more than 5 doses of LSD was to be considered smaller than large for the purposes of the Criminal Code and was to be treated as a misdemeanor subject to a fine equal to a parking ticket.
95.80.225.179 ( talk) 09:58, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
LSD can be misused thus the source says "There are no FDA-approved medications to treat addiction to LSD or other hallucinogens."
This was summarized as "There is no specific treatment for those who misuse the drug."
Addiction is low not none. Use still results in negative outcomes. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 02:25, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the 4'th sentence of the first paragraph: start with the word "Effects" plurar, instead of "Effect" singular.
from: Effect typically begin within half an hour and can last for up to 12 hours.
to: Effects typically begin within half an hour and can last for up to 12 hours. Ggborn ( talk) 13:51, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
There is a typo at the beginning of the article: "There are no known treatments for addiction, if it occur." - should be either "if it can occur" or "should it occur" depending on what is actually meant (it is ambiguous).
This may just be semantics, but: the "if" may imply that one cannot be addicted to LSD. If that claim is made, it should be explicit, whereas the article states before that LSD "does not appear to be very addictive". The later article much farther down then states "LSD is not addictive" (well-cited, I add) which seems a contradiction of sorts (alternatively acknowledging addiction may be possible while later categorically stating it is not). It comes off kind of flip-floppy. I think it may be referring exclusively to physical dependency whereas the former use might be about a more holistic substance abuse view. If this is the intent, it should be clarified. I suggest just removing the "very" to maintain consistency. 50.71.37.108 ( talk) 22:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "snorted" to "insufflated" Oh venner ( talk) 15:24, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I am requesting that the first sentence of the second paragraph be changed back. It used to read "LSD is not addictive" and it was changed to read "LSD does not appear to be very addictive." This does not reflect primary sources that all state LSD has no physiologically addictive properties whatsoever. Psychological addictions to LSD have rarely been documented throughout human history, and most of the documented cases involved other preexisting mental disorders, such as the case of Pink Floyd's original lead singer, Syd Barrett, who had schizophrenia. 2606:A000:4C8A:3000:F93E:DA9:523A:138D ( talk) 05:43, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. While re-reviewing the request I noticed the
first source did not mention "does not appear to be addictive" while the
second source in the article does. Based on the initial response, the sources in the article and the follow-up response by
2606:A000:4C8A:3000:F9BB:600C:FFE2:E182 I feel this edit requires more discussion and a consenus to be reached before being implemented.
♪♫Al
ucard
16♫♪ 07:37, 11 October 2018 (UTC)Under "Overdose" it states "As of 2008 there were no documented fatalities attributed directly to an LSD overdose.[7] Despite this several behavioral fatalities and suicides have occurred due to LSD.[64][65] "
The given reference [64] points to a list of abstracts of studies into the human health effects of LSD - none of which APPEARS to refer to fatalities or suicides unequivocally, or even probably, due to LSD. I say "appears" because I haven't (obviously) read all of the cited papers, but I can't see anything in the abstracts which indicates any of these papers involve a properly documented instance of death due to LSD.
The given reference [65] directs to a website which is equivocal about suicides (although tending toward scepticism). On the subject of behavioural deaths due to LSD usage, it is more open to the suggestion whilst still remaining somewhat sceptical.
Using those references, the sentence should surely read:
"attributed directly to an LSD overdose[7], and although LSD has often been claimed to have caused suicides or behavioural fatalities, there is little documented evidence to support this.[64][65]"
or
"As of 2008 there were no documented fatalities attributed directly to an LSD overdose.[7] Despite this several behavioral fatalities and suicides may have occurred due to LSD.[64][65]"
at the very least — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.80.246.6 ( talk • contribs) 23:26, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
"The extracellular loop 2 leucine 209 residue of the 5-HT2B receptor forms a 'lid' over LSD that appears to trap it in the receptor, and this was implicated in the potency and functional selectivity of LSD and its very slow dissociation rate from the 5-HT2 receptors from the 5-HT2 receptors."
in this sentence, 5-HT2B should read 5-HT2B as mentioned above:
"LSD was found to stay bound to both the 5-HT2A and 5-HT2B receptors for an exceptionally long amount of time," — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.176.226.180 ( talk • contribs) 11:16, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
On the "Adverse effects" section, the source for the graphics measuring drugs in dependence, physical harm, and social harm ranked LSD as more addictive than 7 others. A few lines down the article, in the 'Tolerance' sub-header, it is stated that LSD is not addictive. Both statements are sourced, however the last one fails to clarify if that lack of addiction potential is physical or psychological (many people browsing Wikipedia do not know this difference exists). What gives? Shouldn't the article be updated to hold all of these findings in the same place, and with more clarity? YuriNikolai ( talk) 17:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Long-term flashbacks may occur despite no further use.(referance link https://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/commonly-abused-drugs-charts#lsd)
The article linked to this statement declares that HPPD is the cause of frightening acid flashbacks which is false. HPPD and flashbacks are separate phenomenon as stated by the DSM-5. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinogen_persisting_perception_disorder?wprov=sfla1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-5?wprov=sfla1 In addition to this the other information displayed on drugbuse.gov about the condition HPPD is also flase.
I recommend changing this statement to
"Frequent users may develope a condition called HPPD characterized by a continual presence of sensory disturbances, most commonly visual." With a referance to the DSM or the wiki for HPPD https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinogen_persisting_perception_disorder?wprov=sfla1
Failing that simply removing the referance to drugabuse.gov or removing the statement all together would also be satisfactory. TruthHappinessPeace ( talk) 23:19, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks,Jytdog sorry my information wasn't as helpful as I had intended this is my first time contributing, and I'm still learning the ropes. TruthHappinessPeace ( talk) 02:16, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jan/28/study-shows-how-lsd-messes-with-brains-signalling
also relevant: the scanning techique used is also highly novel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.3.100.29 ( talk) 06:44, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Caharvey11 ( talk) 21:49, 22 June 2019 (UTC)LSD was first documented in the scientific community in 1943 after its psychedelic effects was discovered by Albert Hoffmann[1]. As news of the psychedelic effects of LSD spread, research of the drug steadily increased in popularity amongst the scientific community. Many researchers were interested in its effect on an individual's brain, specifically the brain of someone suffering from schizophrenia[2]. As scientific inquiry into LSD progressed, there began a growing interest in the use of LSD alongside therapy in order to treat a multitude of mental health problems, the most notable being its use in curing alcoholism[3]. This slowly took LSD from the lab into the world of therapy. This positive view of LSD as a medicinal drug did not last for long. With the work of Richard Alpert and Timothy Leary, in 1967 a psychedelic counterculture based around their newly created religion, The League for Spiritual Discovery, began to emerge in North America[2]. The push of the this group encouraged people to take LSD for the purpose of having a spiritual experience. The influence of this counter culture created a crisis for the government as the popularity of LSD and the culture behind was opposed by many on the outside of the counterculture. This inevitably caused the criminalization of LSD, making it a schedule one narcotic in 1965[4]. With this written into law, research into LSD in the use of psychotherapy faded into obscurity for decades, only beginning to make a comeback in the 2000’s[5]. LSD is slowly making a comeback in the world of scientific research, however the only place that LSD assisted Psychotherapy is offered is in Switzerland[5].
^ Dyck, Erika, PhD. "LSD: A New Treatment Emerging from the Past: CMAJ CMAJ." Canadian Medical Association.Journal 187, no. 14 (Oct 06, 2015): 1079-1080. http://search.proquest.com.proxy.lib.uwaterloo.ca/docview/1720440382?accountid=14906. ^ Jump up to: a b Dyck, Erika (2008). Psychedelic Psychiatry: LSD from Clinic to Campus. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. p. 107. ^ Dyck, Erika, PhD. "LSD: A New Treatment Emerging from the Past: CMAJ CMAJ." Canadian Medical Association.Journal 187, no. 14 (Oct 06, 2015): 1079-1080. http://search.proquest.com.proxy.lib.uwaterloo.ca/docview/1720440382?accountid=14906. ^ Robert F. Ulrich and Bernard M. Patten. "The Rise, Decline, and Fall of LSD." Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 34, no. 4 (1991): 561-578. https://muse.jhu.edu/ (accessed June 16, 2019). ^ Jump up to: a b Liechti M. E. (2017). Modern Clinical Research on LSD. Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 42(11), 2114–2127. doi:10.1038/npp.2017.86
Correction regarding, there is no treatment for LSD. Actually in 1966, the founder of the Hare Krishna movement had many disciples who were taking LSD & were drug addicts but they were cured by Bhakti Yoga process and the process of mantra meditation. Roshan Panigrahy ( talk) 17:34, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Concerning the NIH document linked in reference number 16, the text of the Wiki article states that this document claims that LSD is addictive. However, the document never states this. Indeed, on a separate NIH.gov page located at https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/hallucinogens , there is the following:
For example, LSD is not considered an addictive drug because it doesn't cause uncontrollable drug-seeking behavior. However, LSD does produce tolerance, so some users who take the drug repeatedly must take higher doses to achieve the same effect.
Tolerance and addiction are of course not the same thing. I feel that this statement should be removed. 2603:3018:1502:62E1:F68E:38FF:FE94:DF34 ( talk) 04:18, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"Beginning in the 1950s, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) began a research program code named Project MKULTRA. The CIA introduced LSD to the United States, purchasing the entire word's supply for $240,000 and propagating the LSD, through CIA front organizations to American hospitals, clinics, prisons and research centers."
Change "entire word's supply" to "entire world's supply" 73.61.20.18 ( talk) 23:47, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
DePiep ( talk · contribs) removed the word "abbreviated" claiming LSD is not an abbreviation for Lysergic acid diethylamide. [1]. Editor left editing note: "(not an abbr, and no reading disruption eithe by rm that)" which is partially incomprehensible. I reverted on the strength of Dictionary definition, [2] which cites "LB" as abbreviation for pound. Contrary to WP:BRD, editor re-reverted. [3]. I invite editor here to explain and discuss. Grammar'sLittleHelper ( talk) 22:51, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
this is to me very much of a "the sky is blue" thing. technically LSD is an acronym. Loosely speaking, the term abbreviation can encompass acronyms. We don't need a source to call the sky blue, and it is not OR to call the sky blue. The original argument above was, to be frank, stupid. LSD is not an abbreviation nor an acronym for "Lysergic Acid Diethylamide" - Sfarney was just being a robot without understanding what was actually going on, and I reckon that Depiep knew what was going on and was just messing with Sfarney. In the proposed text nobody wins the stupid argument and importantly the content makes absolute sense. Jytdog ( talk) 17:38, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
This is a "the sky is blue" thing. technically LSD is an acronym. Loosely speaking, the term abbreviation can encompass acronyms. We don't need a source to call the sky blue, and it is not OR to call the sky blue.Please be patient and wait for DePiep and Tryptofish to weigh in on the current version, and anybody else who cares. There is no deadline here and nothing to "win". We just need to find content that is good enough for everyone to live with. Jytdog ( talk) 20:56, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Please be patient. There is no deadline. Jytdog ( talk) 21:54, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
Why the abrupt edit summary "the intention of the "who" tag was not to provide anecdotes or gossip" with no further explanation for the removal of sourced material? This seems rather noncollegial.
I am curious why the editor who has placed numerous tags of various sorts on the article isn't himself addressing the problems that concern him. This overtagging defaces the article, when a couple of tags at the pertinent headings would do the job. He could note the particular instances that bother him here on the talk page and invite a discussion that would more likely result in improving the article than would those unsightly tags that seem to linger for years at so many articles on Wikipedia. Tag bombing interrupts the text's flow for the reader, and places an unfair burden on other editors. Carlstak ( talk) 19:38, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
The Psychological Effects subsection is not a pharmacological text in its present form. It reads as an informal exposition describing the psychological effects of LSD in layman's terms rather than as a formal explication of those effects relative to the drug's pharmacology. The edits I made that were subsequently reverted were appropriate to the style of the section as it is written, and as germane to it as the Sam Harris reference with its anecdotal quote. If a strict MEDMOS regime is going to be enforced, the section should be rewritten, and the regime applied consistently to all refs. Granted that the results of psychological testing and even of controlled studies on human psychological responses to LSD can't have the rigor of physiological studies or be interpreted with the same unambiguity, but the psychological effects are far more significant than the physical effects. Much of the research was done before LSD was made illegal in the US (researchers were already feeling the heat from the FDA by 1966); I wouldn't think the literature produced by that research is reliable, especially considering the often freewheeling and not always disciplined approach of the scientists, who were sometimes administering the drug to themselves as well as their subjects. Carlstak ( talk) 04:32, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
I was referring to MDMA#Effects. I imagine the only thing involved in determining desired drug effect is simply asking a bunch of regular users of a particular recreational drug about why they take it. Not particularly complicated IMO. Seppi333 ( Insert 2¢) 19:54, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
@ Jytdog: I believe PNAS is a proper peer-reviewed journal [13] and your revert was in error. Please re-re. Grammar's Li'l Helper 18:15, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
In my opinion, the article is full of useful information, but in its present form is also a confusing, disjointed, unevenly written mish-mash in need of reorganization, if not a complete rewrite. For example: it would be helpful to the reader for the "Effects" section to be explicated before the barren "Uses" section. I imagine most lay readers, if they even make it that far, would rather read the "History" section before the abstruse and technical "Pharmacology" section. Also, one would expect more precise language than "ingesting vast amounts of LSD" in the "Overdose" section; meaningless or POV phrases like "a sense that one's thoughts are spiraling into themselves" or "dazzling and wildly inventive" don't belong in the article; and what the hell is a "psychedelic life style"? The "Forms" subsection says "More than 200 types of LSD tablets have been encountered since 1969 and more than 350 blotter paper designs have been observed since 1975." The source given for this information says "More than 200 types of LSD tablets have been identified since 1969", and "Since 1975 more than 350 paper designs have been classified" but neither it nor the article says by whom. I could personally vouch for at least 100 of the paper designs, but I don't think my say-so would count.;-)
Finally, there are still 7 "citation needed' tags on the article, but as is usually the case on Wikipedia, the citation police have shown little interest in finding the needed cites. Carlstak ( talk) 16:03, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
Cited source for this statement in first paragraph is a 404. Secondary reference links are working. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cow trix ( talk • contribs) 10:43, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 8 external links on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:05, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Can we please use a common measurement (micrograms) for all weight references? Confusing and disjointed to use both grams and micrograms — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.253.60.5 ( talk) 22:25, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Is there anything worth salvaging in that article? I think it should otherwise be redirected here; it looks to be mostly garbage. Sizeofint ( talk) 02:36, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
This article is really shit, I tried to read it but I couldn't figure out what was going on at all. I'm laughing at how terrible this is. Cheers.
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 20:16, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
The source provided for the overdose section of this article is the following URL: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1129381/
"Eight patients were seen within 15 minutes of intranasal self-administration of large amounts of pure D-lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) tartrate powder." The overdose section of this article makes no mention that the fatal 1,000 to 7,000ug doses were administrated intranasally. It should be noted that this is an incredibly uncommon method of administration for LSD, as LSD is normally taken orally and that from my research at least I cannot find a single source that shows when administered orally LSD is fatal in doses above 1,000ug. In fact, I cannot find a single recorded case of any dosage at all being administered orally resulting in a fatality. There are even anecdotal reports of people taking doses that are an order of magnitude higher than what is described here, as high as 30,000 micrograms. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shrimp4074 ( talk • contribs) 21:19, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
You can not overdose on LSD because I have seen guys do like 15 tabs of LSD at once & he was just fine & is still alive to day Skrodow ( talk) 22:29, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
I have never heard either of any case of oral overdose outside of those contrived conditions of the labs above deliberately doing so to put their human guinea pigs at risk. The article should reflect this along with the contrived and pointless nature of both the research and the article section. Mattjs ( talk)
But you have just clued me to the symptoms diagram of the upper chest: Now indeed I suspect that these symptoms may be associated only with the contrived lab overdoses above and not normal usage and dosage. If so then the diagram and related pieces of the article will have to be correctly cited/referenced or else these things WILL be removed. It seems to me that there may well be serious un-scientific anti-drug POV creeping into this article and over-stating its case by using the technique of baffling the common reader with bullshit to do so. 121.44.104.240 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:22, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Pseudohallucinations are not a effect of psychedelics nor does the source have any mention of "pseudohallucinations". This should be fixed because the drug has no correlation to the definition of the word. A more accurate phrase would just be "internal and external hallucinations", as this is exactly what happens, nothing is "pseudo" about psychedelics and nothing on them seem unreal. Whoever wrote that might feel that you can see unicorns on LSD but that's not the case, one should research the effects of the substance before writing about its effects on the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.185.156.165 ( talk) 04:28, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
This should say stimulating. The trips aren't simulating anything.
Done, thanks for the notice. Sizeofint ( talk) 08:46, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
In the first sentence after the name the abbreviation for lysergic acid diethylamide is refered as LSD, but no mention that his stands for the german "Lysergsäurediäthylamid". One can find the german translation out by reading further, but I think this could be mentioned in the sake of completeness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loudvalley99 ( talk • contribs) 20:09, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Add New section: Areas of the Brain affected by LSD Lysergic Acid Diethylamid (LSD) is a serotonergic hallucinogen which is actually better able to bind to serotonin receptors than serotonin itself. Once bound, LSD is able to decrease neuronal oscillations, especially in areas of densely expressed 5-HT2A receptors like the visual cortex, posterior cingulate cortex, the parahippocampus, the retionsplenial cortex, and various other areas of the default mode network. One of the most well-known effects of LSD has on the brain are its marked influence on the visual cortex resulting in visual hallucinations. A study performed in March 2016, modern neuroimaging was used to track the effects of LSD in the brain, using three complementary neuroimaging techniques: arterial spin labeling (ASL), blood oxygen level-dependent (BOLD) measures, and magnetoencephalography (MEG), during resting state conditions [1] to compare brain activity between resting “normal” brain activity and activity after LSD was administered. This study was able to identify the areas of the brain with increased and decreased activity which correlate with and would contribute to the hallucinations.
The study was performed under eyes-closed, task free, resting conditions. In these conditions there should be little to no activity in the visual cortex(V1) and during this time however the scans showed increased activity in the V1 including increased blood flow, “these increases correlated positively with ratings of complex imagery”
[2]. Also observed in the V1 were increases in the resting state functional connectivity (RSFC) and decreases in alpha power. Alpha wavescause a “functional inhibition of task irrelevant areas”
[3]. For example, when performing a visual task alpha power would decrease in the V1 allowing it to function while the alpha power might increase in other areas like the auditory cortex. On LSD, the decrease in the alpha wave inhibitor allows for increases in connectivity or desegregation of different brain regions which allows other senses like touch and sound to contribute to the visual experience, this is referred to as synesthesia, where a person is able to “see” smells or sounds. Another study which focused on ayahuasca hallucinations, used fMRI scans to compare eye-open conditions against eyes-closed conditions after the consumption of ayahuasca and found, Cite error: A <ref>
tag is missing the closing </ref>
(see the
help page).. This could be contributed to by other areas of the brain which are also more active after the consumption of psychedelics. The scans also revealed Brodmann areas, which is part of the retrosplenial cortex, associated with episodic memory and contextual associations also were more active during these visual hallucinations which correlates to the desegregation of the V1 on LSD. The psychedelics cause the visual cortex to acts as though there is an external stimulus when in fact there is none. Under normal eye-open conditions you would expect to find increase CBF, decreased alpha power, and increased RSFC, which is instead what is observed in eyes-closed conditions of psychedelics, the visual cortex is essentially “seeing with eyes closed” and the desegregation between the Brodmann areas and the visual cortex allow increased communication of episodic memories including emotion to color the visual experience of the hallucinations (de Araujo et al., 2012).
References
Bri nichols ( talk) 21:46, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Remove "...in the conformational state of the drug..." Under Pharmacodynamics, please change "The diethylamide group of LSD forms a "lid" in the conformational state of the drug..." to "The extracellular loop 2 leucine 209 residue of the 5-HT2B receptor forms a 'lid' over LSD..." 152.23.168.53 ( talk) 19:20, 27 January 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 14:15, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Please change link on glutamate to point to "gluatamate (neurotransmitter)" page. Nickfiacco ( talk) 21:19, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:27, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/94-9088.ZO.html%7D%7DWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 16:13, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved - consensus is clearly against the renaming of this article. DrStrauss talk 13:53, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
Lysergic acid diethylamide →
LSD – The
common name for the substance is "LSD", not the scientific name.
Gaioa (
talk) 02:35, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia should use commonly used names for articles, even should the common name be formally incorrect. For instance,
Ringo Starr is not titled "Richard Starkey",
Chloroform is not titled "Trichloromethane", and so on. I say we rename it to simply "LSD" for clarification and ease-of-finding. Of course, the name itself,
[15], redirects here, so it's not a problem by itself. Only a formality of
WP:COMMONNAME. Also, there is nothing wrong with the rest of the article, and the intro of Lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), also known as acid, is...
is excellent, even more so with the title of "LSD". But rename it, I say. I would do it right away, but I don't wanna shock all you
drug- and
medication- writers without a second opinion.
Gaioa (
talk) 02:35, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
Doc Ellis claimed to throw a no hitter on June 12, 1970. Djwedge ( talk) 09:04, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:04, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lysergic acid diethylamide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.telegrafo.com.ec/english-bulletin/item/ecuador-could-regulate-drug-sales.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 06:22, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
To conform to MOS:US, uses of U.S. should be changed to US as the article has other country abbreviations (viz. UK). Thanks, 142.161.81.20 ( talk) 00:50, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
"The Grateful Dead were inextricably linked to LSD in the United States, and Grateful Dead concerts provided the primary distribution network for LSD through the mid-1990s"
Maybe A primary network, but not the primary network. How would that even work? Professional drug dealers that tour around the country with the band selling LSD? (I'm sure they did, but I doubt that was a main source nationally speaking). What about places they rarely visited? You only got a chance to buy it once every so many years when the Dead came into the region? Midlevel suppliers had to travel to where-ever they were playing to stock up, and/or stock up when they were in town and hope the supply lasts until they return again? No other drug market works remotely like this, and I see no reason LSD would be different. Assuming each region had its own supply independent of GD concerts, I really doubt the amount sold at concerts outweighed the rest of the country's sources; depends on what you mean by primary. Largest single distribution route, perhaps, but that's different. A lot of acid was sold at Dead concerts, and likely the regional supply and use rate increased for a while when the band visited a region, but tats about it. That doesn't make it the primary distribution network for LSD any more than saying discos were the primary resource for cocaine...and that would at least make some sense, since a disco doesn't move all over the country irregularly. And how can someone prove a claim like that anyway? AnnaGoFast ( talk) 12:34, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
The picture titled "Physical effects of LSD" seems unnecessary. Most of the effects listed in the picture are already mentioned in the text, and the ones that aren't should simply be added. I don't see a need for a picture showing the reader the location of the mouth, eyes, heart, etc. in a human body, as this is wp:Common knowledge. CodeTalker ( talk) 01:50, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
I completely agree. In addition the template for the picture was originally designed for things like alcohol that listed the chronic effects it has specifically highlighting all the organs that can fail. It's use to describe acute effects many of which are pretty benign. Now that you've pointed it out, when I got to the stupid use of a genetic template that actually told me nothing of any importance it distracted me from the content. It's been a week without any argument in support of its use so I'll remove it. If anyone felt strongly about it they are most welcome to defend its use. User:Methylated603 ( talk) 12:31 6 June 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Reference 36 is a dead link (already marked). The article being referenced is officially rehosted here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140673610614626 DarkReviver ( talk) 12:09, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In "In the 1950s, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) beleived the drug might be useful for mind control so tested it on people, some without their knowledge, in a program called MK-Ultra", the word believed is misspelled as "beleived". Change "beleived" to "believed"! KrazIvan ( talk) 14:07, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
The Entheogenic Myth does not belong in a lexicon, and even here right next an absurd hallucination image. You should know better. (unsigned comment by 84.208.136.53)
There is a lot of sympathetic quotes related to LSD. Balancing the article with some of the other side would be healthy.
For instance. "In a culture where a lot of people just fake it, I think in the whole hippie times, Wendy Carlos (Switched On Bach) was the real acidmessiah. He turned gay. " - unknown.
His work is really LSD is GOD type stuff. While probably most other stuff is heroin. ;) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.208.136.53 ( talk) 11:48, 19 August 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
A sentence in Section 8.2 Legal status - Czech Republic doesn't make logical sense. Replace this sentence:
Under the Regulation No. 467/2009 Coll, possession of more than 5 doses of LSD was to be considered smaller than large for the purposes of the Criminal Code and was to be treated as a misdemeanor subject to a fine equal to a parking ticket.
with corrected:
Under the Regulation No. 467/2009 Coll, possession of no more than 5 doses of LSD was to be considered smaller than large for the purposes of the Criminal Code and was to be treated as a misdemeanor subject to a fine equal to a parking ticket.
95.80.225.179 ( talk) 09:58, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
LSD can be misused thus the source says "There are no FDA-approved medications to treat addiction to LSD or other hallucinogens."
This was summarized as "There is no specific treatment for those who misuse the drug."
Addiction is low not none. Use still results in negative outcomes. Doc James ( talk · contribs · email) 02:25, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change the 4'th sentence of the first paragraph: start with the word "Effects" plurar, instead of "Effect" singular.
from: Effect typically begin within half an hour and can last for up to 12 hours.
to: Effects typically begin within half an hour and can last for up to 12 hours. Ggborn ( talk) 13:51, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
There is a typo at the beginning of the article: "There are no known treatments for addiction, if it occur." - should be either "if it can occur" or "should it occur" depending on what is actually meant (it is ambiguous).
This may just be semantics, but: the "if" may imply that one cannot be addicted to LSD. If that claim is made, it should be explicit, whereas the article states before that LSD "does not appear to be very addictive". The later article much farther down then states "LSD is not addictive" (well-cited, I add) which seems a contradiction of sorts (alternatively acknowledging addiction may be possible while later categorically stating it is not). It comes off kind of flip-floppy. I think it may be referring exclusively to physical dependency whereas the former use might be about a more holistic substance abuse view. If this is the intent, it should be clarified. I suggest just removing the "very" to maintain consistency. 50.71.37.108 ( talk) 22:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Change "snorted" to "insufflated" Oh venner ( talk) 15:24, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
I am requesting that the first sentence of the second paragraph be changed back. It used to read "LSD is not addictive" and it was changed to read "LSD does not appear to be very addictive." This does not reflect primary sources that all state LSD has no physiologically addictive properties whatsoever. Psychological addictions to LSD have rarely been documented throughout human history, and most of the documented cases involved other preexisting mental disorders, such as the case of Pink Floyd's original lead singer, Syd Barrett, who had schizophrenia. 2606:A000:4C8A:3000:F93E:DA9:523A:138D ( talk) 05:43, 10 October 2018 (UTC)
{{
edit semi-protected}}
template. While re-reviewing the request I noticed the
first source did not mention "does not appear to be addictive" while the
second source in the article does. Based on the initial response, the sources in the article and the follow-up response by
2606:A000:4C8A:3000:F9BB:600C:FFE2:E182 I feel this edit requires more discussion and a consenus to be reached before being implemented.
♪♫Al
ucard
16♫♪ 07:37, 11 October 2018 (UTC)Under "Overdose" it states "As of 2008 there were no documented fatalities attributed directly to an LSD overdose.[7] Despite this several behavioral fatalities and suicides have occurred due to LSD.[64][65] "
The given reference [64] points to a list of abstracts of studies into the human health effects of LSD - none of which APPEARS to refer to fatalities or suicides unequivocally, or even probably, due to LSD. I say "appears" because I haven't (obviously) read all of the cited papers, but I can't see anything in the abstracts which indicates any of these papers involve a properly documented instance of death due to LSD.
The given reference [65] directs to a website which is equivocal about suicides (although tending toward scepticism). On the subject of behavioural deaths due to LSD usage, it is more open to the suggestion whilst still remaining somewhat sceptical.
Using those references, the sentence should surely read:
"attributed directly to an LSD overdose[7], and although LSD has often been claimed to have caused suicides or behavioural fatalities, there is little documented evidence to support this.[64][65]"
or
"As of 2008 there were no documented fatalities attributed directly to an LSD overdose.[7] Despite this several behavioral fatalities and suicides may have occurred due to LSD.[64][65]"
at the very least — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.80.246.6 ( talk • contribs) 23:26, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
"The extracellular loop 2 leucine 209 residue of the 5-HT2B receptor forms a 'lid' over LSD that appears to trap it in the receptor, and this was implicated in the potency and functional selectivity of LSD and its very slow dissociation rate from the 5-HT2 receptors from the 5-HT2 receptors."
in this sentence, 5-HT2B should read 5-HT2B as mentioned above:
"LSD was found to stay bound to both the 5-HT2A and 5-HT2B receptors for an exceptionally long amount of time," — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.176.226.180 ( talk • contribs) 11:16, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
On the "Adverse effects" section, the source for the graphics measuring drugs in dependence, physical harm, and social harm ranked LSD as more addictive than 7 others. A few lines down the article, in the 'Tolerance' sub-header, it is stated that LSD is not addictive. Both statements are sourced, however the last one fails to clarify if that lack of addiction potential is physical or psychological (many people browsing Wikipedia do not know this difference exists). What gives? Shouldn't the article be updated to hold all of these findings in the same place, and with more clarity? YuriNikolai ( talk) 17:29, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Long-term flashbacks may occur despite no further use.(referance link https://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/commonly-abused-drugs-charts#lsd)
The article linked to this statement declares that HPPD is the cause of frightening acid flashbacks which is false. HPPD and flashbacks are separate phenomenon as stated by the DSM-5. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinogen_persisting_perception_disorder?wprov=sfla1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-5?wprov=sfla1 In addition to this the other information displayed on drugbuse.gov about the condition HPPD is also flase.
I recommend changing this statement to
"Frequent users may develope a condition called HPPD characterized by a continual presence of sensory disturbances, most commonly visual." With a referance to the DSM or the wiki for HPPD https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinogen_persisting_perception_disorder?wprov=sfla1
Failing that simply removing the referance to drugabuse.gov or removing the statement all together would also be satisfactory. TruthHappinessPeace ( talk) 23:19, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Thanks,Jytdog sorry my information wasn't as helpful as I had intended this is my first time contributing, and I'm still learning the ropes. TruthHappinessPeace ( talk) 02:16, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/jan/28/study-shows-how-lsd-messes-with-brains-signalling
also relevant: the scanning techique used is also highly novel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 185.3.100.29 ( talk) 06:44, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Caharvey11 ( talk) 21:49, 22 June 2019 (UTC)LSD was first documented in the scientific community in 1943 after its psychedelic effects was discovered by Albert Hoffmann[1]. As news of the psychedelic effects of LSD spread, research of the drug steadily increased in popularity amongst the scientific community. Many researchers were interested in its effect on an individual's brain, specifically the brain of someone suffering from schizophrenia[2]. As scientific inquiry into LSD progressed, there began a growing interest in the use of LSD alongside therapy in order to treat a multitude of mental health problems, the most notable being its use in curing alcoholism[3]. This slowly took LSD from the lab into the world of therapy. This positive view of LSD as a medicinal drug did not last for long. With the work of Richard Alpert and Timothy Leary, in 1967 a psychedelic counterculture based around their newly created religion, The League for Spiritual Discovery, began to emerge in North America[2]. The push of the this group encouraged people to take LSD for the purpose of having a spiritual experience. The influence of this counter culture created a crisis for the government as the popularity of LSD and the culture behind was opposed by many on the outside of the counterculture. This inevitably caused the criminalization of LSD, making it a schedule one narcotic in 1965[4]. With this written into law, research into LSD in the use of psychotherapy faded into obscurity for decades, only beginning to make a comeback in the 2000’s[5]. LSD is slowly making a comeback in the world of scientific research, however the only place that LSD assisted Psychotherapy is offered is in Switzerland[5].
^ Dyck, Erika, PhD. "LSD: A New Treatment Emerging from the Past: CMAJ CMAJ." Canadian Medical Association.Journal 187, no. 14 (Oct 06, 2015): 1079-1080. http://search.proquest.com.proxy.lib.uwaterloo.ca/docview/1720440382?accountid=14906. ^ Jump up to: a b Dyck, Erika (2008). Psychedelic Psychiatry: LSD from Clinic to Campus. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. p. 107. ^ Dyck, Erika, PhD. "LSD: A New Treatment Emerging from the Past: CMAJ CMAJ." Canadian Medical Association.Journal 187, no. 14 (Oct 06, 2015): 1079-1080. http://search.proquest.com.proxy.lib.uwaterloo.ca/docview/1720440382?accountid=14906. ^ Robert F. Ulrich and Bernard M. Patten. "The Rise, Decline, and Fall of LSD." Perspectives in Biology and Medicine 34, no. 4 (1991): 561-578. https://muse.jhu.edu/ (accessed June 16, 2019). ^ Jump up to: a b Liechti M. E. (2017). Modern Clinical Research on LSD. Neuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 42(11), 2114–2127. doi:10.1038/npp.2017.86
Correction regarding, there is no treatment for LSD. Actually in 1966, the founder of the Hare Krishna movement had many disciples who were taking LSD & were drug addicts but they were cured by Bhakti Yoga process and the process of mantra meditation. Roshan Panigrahy ( talk) 17:34, 21 July 2019 (UTC)
Concerning the NIH document linked in reference number 16, the text of the Wiki article states that this document claims that LSD is addictive. However, the document never states this. Indeed, on a separate NIH.gov page located at https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/hallucinogens , there is the following:
For example, LSD is not considered an addictive drug because it doesn't cause uncontrollable drug-seeking behavior. However, LSD does produce tolerance, so some users who take the drug repeatedly must take higher doses to achieve the same effect.
Tolerance and addiction are of course not the same thing. I feel that this statement should be removed. 2603:3018:1502:62E1:F68E:38FF:FE94:DF34 ( talk) 04:18, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
This
edit request to
Lysergic acid diethylamide has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"Beginning in the 1950s, the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) began a research program code named Project MKULTRA. The CIA introduced LSD to the United States, purchasing the entire word's supply for $240,000 and propagating the LSD, through CIA front organizations to American hospitals, clinics, prisons and research centers."
Change "entire word's supply" to "entire world's supply" 73.61.20.18 ( talk) 23:47, 21 October 2019 (UTC)