Goodbye to Sasha Shulgin, Godfather of Psychedelics
alumni.berkeley.edu
alumni.berkeley.edu
> Ecstasy, known as MDMA
It's MDMA (the chemical compound 3,4-methylenedioxy-N-methylamphetamine) that's usually known as "Ecstasy", but many other chemicals are also sold as "Ecstasy" as well.
Very few people die from MDMA overdose, or even the effects of MDMA, but that doesn't always extend to the other chemicals sold as ecstasy[1] - I was at the Warehouse Project opening night last year where a guy died and several others were put in induced comas because they were supplied with PMA rather than MDMA[2]. Whether or not you agree with using psychoactive chemicals recreationally, any misinformation can be dangerous to the people who will use them. I feel this error should have been caught by the editor.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDMA#Purity_and_dosage_of_.22e... [2]: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-24314997
Yet another obvious reason to legalize all recreational drugs...
Perhaps that's changed, but it seems far more likely that cheaper substitutes would be used (ephedrine, 'research chemicals', etc).
For the record, the nickname of the drug PMA is 'Dr. death'. very easy to OD on this shit.
From what I understand, PMA/PMMA is what you get if you start with (relatively easy to source) anisole rather than the controlled MDA/MDMA precursor safrole. Then you have a product that you might be able to sell, maybe, and if you tell people anything you tell them it's "extra strong" or some other crap.
And yeah, when batches of these things come to market, kids die.
Dr. Shulgin's work directly and positively effected profound change in many lives. He was a uniquely talented chemist and thinker, and his genius will be sorely missed.
"There are no casual experiments."
This man is an inspiration for a coming generation of scientists whose love of knowledge and truth should not be discredited because of their willingness to experiment with life and reality. He knew the chemistry and made it beautiful.
When my friend was shooting part of Dirty Pictures, he texted me to say "I just exchanged dirty limericks with Shulgin!"
In a paragraph it mentions his work with the DEA, his seminars and reference books. Immediately below he's photographed in an erowid t-shirt and talk about his experiments with friends.
Every time I read an article or have a discussion even remotely related to this topic I feel like I have to fight back the urge to go into rants and platitudes. Even the path to effective decriminalization of marijuana (and perhaps later some psychedelics) through medicinal use is enraging.
It's like ending race based slavery on the grounds that the majority of slaves have some white ancestry.
I never heard of this person before he died, but I did read about him after that, and he was no friend to a tyrant, let me assure you. Spend some time reading other sources about him if you are really interested, I'm sure the Wiki article as they tend to do paints both pictures, but I think you'll find very few (individual) people with a single mind about him that didn't like him a whole lot.
There a wizard you know of needs a retirement plan?
But still it's a chemist, who earned the title by writing a book about psychedelic chemical compounds and their effects, but which is not as... psychologically deep as other books (some of which have been written almost half a century ago) on psychedelics.
That said, my Goddaughter has two Godfathers, so why can't psychedelics? I would honour Albert Hofmann with the title as well.
sasha almost exclusively synthesized compounds that were already in the academic literature. he reproduced others' work and gave minimal attribution.
maybe i should write a book about a whole bunch of stuff other ppl did, not give proper attribution, then demand that people prove that i did not invent it.
If you can prove that God does not exist to satisfy a crowd of people, then you are indeed a powerful philosophizer. But for me to show that God does exist, all I have to do is show you all God once. It should be much easier for me, right? So why don't you get off your armchair if you know so much and find the requisite one example to show, since you say that none of his work is original it should be easy.
I knew some folks there in the late 90's that would order Pihkal and other banned books from the States (via Amazon.com, IIRC) and it would be a point of pride if your books slipped past customs and ended up on your doorstep.
Learn about them, and experiment with them if you want to, and research what the hell it is you're getting into before you do it.
Psychedelics are not magic, they're drugs.
Or maybe you mean the organics brought into being by what some would call the original Godfather ;-)
"MDMA was first synthesized in 1912 by Merck chemist Anton Köllisch" -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDMA#History
But Alexander Shulgin extensively synthesised, tested and documented - both the process and the psychedelic effects of - thousands of psychoactive compounds.
Next you'll be telling me Americans made the first flying plane, or made the first working digital computer, the transistor, or invented the wheel?
This is a misleading article from an academic institution.
He found and published multiple, relatively simple synthesis routes for some pre-existing substances and many, many psychoactive substances that had never been seen before. He pioneered exploration into their effects and he shared the knowledge with the world, despite the censorious wishes of worldwide governments and law enforcement.
That makes him pretty unique and special in my book.
>> He is credited with introducing MDMA to psychologists in the late 1970s.
Who's taking credit for the initial synthesis?
there is nothing so american as downvoting the truth.
I'm just going to make a mocking post that notes that "wrapping yourself in the truth" doesn't insulate your lies from the light of morning, whether you're American or not.
2. The article doesn't say he discovered it, I didn't say that either, only that he introduced it to psychiatrists.
So what exactly are both of you talking about with taking credit?
(for reference I'm not american either)
Sasha Shulgin was a true hacker with a great heart in real life.
But to your second point, yes, HPPD[1] is a serious condition.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinogen_persisting_percept...
that said, he is typically over-attributed as being the 'godfather' of this field in an academic context when nearly every single compound he synthesized was originally synthesized and researched by someone else. there are thousands of researchers from the pharma industry and academia who spent huge parts of their adult lives just synthesizing a few of these compounds who often receive zero attribution for their life's work. knowing this, i find it rather offensive that an academic institution would provide such a trumped-up tribute to sasha shulgin.
oh, and for the record, a lot of the syntheses in tikhal and pikhal have _intentional_ omissions and errors, which makes those texts mostly useless from a synthetic standpoint.
Similarly to Nursie, I'm interested in knowing where you learned this piece of information.
I have been researching Sasha's work for months now, reading PiHKAL, interviewing his wife, attending his memorial, talking to his supporters etc... And not once have I heard mention of this. Yes, Shulgin is the GODFATHER of Psychedelics because MDMA was originally synthesized in 1912. But Timothy Leary himself called Sasha one of the century's most important scientists. Dozens of respected scientists and academics attended his memorial in support of his work. I don't believe that his role in introducing psychedelics to the wider world is "overly attributed" at all.
Check NYTimes Mag profile on the guy http://nyti.ms/WG8wFS
"Shulgin has been credited with jump-starting today's therapeutic research, but he prefers to play down his role. While heartened by the MDMA studies and happy to play psychedelic elder statesman, he insists that he is not a healer or a shaman but a researcher. Asked why he does what he does, he replies, ''I'm curious!'' He is most animated when describing the feeling that accompanies the discovery of a new compound, no matter what its properties. Sometimes he compares the moment to that of artistic creation (''The pleasure of composing a new painting or piece of music''), and sometimes it sounds more like a close encounter of the third kind (''You're meeting something you don't know, and it's meeting something it doesn't know. And so you have this exchange of properties and ideas'')."
I've never heard this said before. Can you be more specific or point to a reference I could read on this?
try them out yourself, see what happens.
I'm still waiting for a reference. I'm genuinely interested.