Image:
More In This Article
-
Overview
Self-Experimenters Step Up for Science
-
Sidebar
Day 1: Self-Styled Cyborg Dreams of Outwitting Superintelligent Machines
-
Sidebar
Day 2: Filmmaker Gained Weight to Prove a Point about Portion Size
-
Sidebar
Day 3: Malaria Vaccine Maven Baits Irradiated Mosquitoes with His Own Arm
-
Sidebar
Day 4: To Purge Binges, Alcoholic Cardiologist Self-Prescribed an Experimental Drug
-
Sidebar
Day 5: Can 200,000 Hours of Baby Talk Untie a Robot's Tongue?
-
Sidebar
Day 6: Self-Experimenter Freed Himself from Insomnia, Acne and Love Handles
-
Sidebar
Day 7: Daughter of MRI Researcher Offered Her Brain for Virtual Dissection
This is the final story the series of eight stories in our feature on self-experimenters.
Alexander Shulgin is the world's foremost "psychonaut." The 82-year-old chemist has not only created more of the 300 known consciousness-altering (or psychoactive) compounds than anyone living or dead, he has, by his own account, sampled somewhere between 200 and 250 of them himself—most of them cooked up in the musty lab behind his home in the hills east of Berkeley, Calif., where he has shared many a chemical voyage with his wife of 26 years, Ann.
"I take them myself because I am interested in their activity in the human mind. How would you test that in a rat or mouse?" says Shulgin, known to friends as Sasha.
He has paid the price for his avocation. Some of his creations have induced uncontrollable vomiting, paralysis and the feeling that his bones were melting, among other terrors. And though some believe Shulgin has opened the doors of perception to a new class of potentially therapeutic mind-altering compounds, others argue that he bears responsibility for the damage that ongoing abuse of such now-illicit substances can cause.
As a student at the University of California, Berkeley, in the 1950s, Shulgin's gateway drug was mescaline, a naturally occurring psychedelic found in peyote and other groovy cacti. "It introduced me to new colors which I had never seen before," Shulgin says. "It allowed me to interpret whatever I was looking at with an entirely new vocabulary…. And yet, what a simple structure!"
In the 1960s, while working as a biochemist at The Dow Chemical Co. in San Francisco, he couldn't resist tinkering with the potent mescaline molecule. He synthesized entirely new compounds that retained similar, trippy qualities. Some variations were less potent, but others were even more powerful or imparted their own unique twist.
Shulgin, who left Dow in 1965 to consult for the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) among other pursuits, offered the best of his new chemical darlings to Ann, his second wife; the most promising of these were passed along to a close circle of 10 friends until the mid-1990s, when the DEA, no longer paying for his services, raided his lab and revoked his license to work with illegal drugs.
His personal favorite, which he describes as "extraordinarily comfortable and quite erotic," is known simply as 2C-B for its chemical makeup.
One by one, Shulgin has seen many of the compounds he invented or experimented with become illegal in the U.S., including some that have never been synthesized by anyone and some that he thought might prove therapeutic, such as MDMA (3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine), better known as ecstasy. "I was very sad to see MDMA achieve the status of a Schedule 1 drug," a designation that prohibits its manufacture or use in the U.S., he says. "I felt that it would inhibit research into its medical value and that's the way it's turned out."
Some researchers agree that the government's response to psychoactive drugs has deprived them of a unique window into human consciousness. After all, rodents will happily ingest most intoxicants and narcotics —from marijuana to heroin—but not the headier psychedelics.
"Peculiarly, not only did we make them illegal, but we backed away from them scientifically," says neuroscientist Roland Griffiths of Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, one of the researchers who is restarting basic research into psychedelics. His lab has shown that psilocybin, the active ingredient in the variety of fungi known as magic mushrooms, can bring on lasting feelings of well-being. This may indicate that it could be harnessed to help clinically depressed or addicted patients.
Shulgin, who continues to study cacti for new chemical routes to altered states, predicts that by the year 2060, the number of different known psychedelics will have grown from 300 to 2,000. He intends to discover—and perhaps sample—as many of them as he can. "It is like opening a door to a hallway," he says, "that has unopened doors for its entire length, and behind every door is a world with which you are totally unfamiliar."
See what we're tweeting about
27 Comments
Add CommentThis is anecdotal, but my observations have been that these drugs have significantly different effects on children and teens than on adults. I have rarely run across people who have had significant issues when they started after 35. For those that started before puberty, a high percentage had problems. Personally, I think they can be quite beneficial to those 35 and up, and the older a person is the more positive the outcome.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think crystal sugar and salt should be on the schedule 1 list, probably also butter, it's extremely toxic compared to psilocybin. E Demaray
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDear Al, don't let the Stuff Nazzies ever learn the formula for your next favorite compound. Only whisper it to the enlightened! Next, they will make compounds illegal that don't have a formula.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThanks Scientific American for this article, and all the other recent psychedelic related articles. It is so refreshing to see someone talking about them honestly.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBest regards
Of course the gov would want to put the brakes on this research. They remember back to the 60s, 70s, and 80s when they themselves tripped their (empty) brains out. In the end, the only stability their resulting incompetence could afford them was government employment. Thus, incompetence can only be expected.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou're right, John Toradze, that is anecdotal. Is this some form of mid-life crisis? Have you considered the possibility that kids who seek extreme drugs at a young age might have other social and enviromental problems that might impact their development?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhy the age of 35? Youth is wasted on the young? Perhaps drugs are wasted on the old. There is quite a difference between "children and teens" and "35 and up."
You don't specify what "problems" those who "started before puberty" supposedly had. But I suspect they might be only subjectively problems?
Anecdotally, I know a couple of people who started using psilocybin mushrooms at age 12 and who are now traditionally "successful" adults.
I also know several aging hippies who feel that they can no longer "handle" mushrooms and lsd. Take from that what you will about the relationship between age and psychedelic drugs. Although I might take a look at available pertinent research before making up my mind either way.
Well said/written... It is my belief that psychedelics reflect and amplify the psyche. Therefore, as Tim Leary suggested "set, set & setting" are the main factors to try and ensure a "safe" trip - ie. how you feel, who you're with and where you are.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe only potential difference I can see age making, is that you may be more grounded in your reality, thus the "ego death" experienced may have less of a profound effect. However, I've met plenty of people twice my age who're still mentally stuck at school; and others who are so rooted in their idea of the world, that psychedelics would have a potentially long-lasting negative effect on them.
I said it once and I'll say it again. Chemicals are what primative societies use to alter their consciousness. We're supposed to live in a high tech society. We have the technology to do this stuff. It's about time we started acting like it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@MarshallBarnes: Your statements appear to be rather close minded regarding the very nature of life itself. There is either existence or non-existence.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhile existing for however many years in this life, some individuals actively make the choice to alter the perceptions of their mind by means of foreign substances.
Have you ever drank a beer or had a coffee or soda? You've altered your own consciousness. Is that primitive as well? Because I really can't get by without coffee. :)
If you do find contentedness in letting technology and society experience reality for you, please understand that not every shares this opinion of how to live their lives.
You know, another1one, maybe if you hadn't spent so much time altering your perceptions with foreign substances you might have been able to comprehend what I wrote.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI said nothing about letting technology or society experience reality for me. I said that the technology exists to alter our states of consciousness, and I said it within the context of the types of alterations that were being described by powerful psychoactive drugs, not getting a coffee buzz or a beer drunk.
As a professional researcher in the area of consciousness and technology, I dare say I know a bit more about the subject than you appear to be able to handle.
@MarshallBarnes: I’ll say it again, if you choose to use technology as a means to alter your consciousness, that’s just great. However, your contention that [Psychoactive] Chemicals are only useful to primitive beings is ludicrous.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHave you actually experienced any sort of psychedelic substance in your lifetime or just read about them? Why should others forgo the experience and use technology instead of chemicals? Please list the studies that have shown altered perception through technology provides the best altered conscious state and should be used by everyone. It shouldn’t be too hard to find them, considering you’re a pro and all that (We’re all really impressed over here, by the way).
In the meantime, feel free to live just like you think someone living in a high tech society should. Just rein it in a little when you play the high and mighty knowledge holder of how life’s experiences should be had by all. It’s a big world out there, guy.
MarshallBarnes: your comments are naive. Technology alters our consciousness by changing the relative amounts of neurotransmitters in the brain. So do alcohol, cigarettes... and anger.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisanother1one is right on target.
I believe that we could stand to learn or remember a great deal from primitive societies. A means of getting back to the basics on a lot of things. I, for one, have grown up in the 80's and now look at how we operate as a whole and struggle to find ways of life that have great value or significance in modern day US that feed the mind body and soul. Material mindedness is largely how most evaluate each others worth and all of us see (for some start to avoid) how empty it leaves us and explains how and why some people act as crazy as they do or why they feel a need to point the finger. Like MarshallBarnes (how do you feel? I need to tell everyone they are wrong) was demonstrating live it through high technology, further proving materialism. It goes to show that not all man kind is ready to advance into that hallway where there are limitless door of perception. Close minded people are the ones to miss out on great gains.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLet's see having done both ; Psychedelics and High Technology each has their benefits and (uh I don't want to say drawbacks) and areas where they miss; High Tech without better and more artistic development lacks the serendipity that chemicals have; Overall it (high tech) is safer and harder to get into deep water with; But that is currently it's lack it can be quite superficial giving us repetetive video games and the like; That may bget better if people with artisitc vision get involved.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUh, it's sort of arrogant to say "I am better than those other people and that's why people should believe believe me." Beware on a tribe of deep ecotypes will descend and point out that those primative sociaieties did not threaten to destroy the planet. The bottom line is there are things that they may have grasphed that we fail to grasp.
However each method of exploration has it's features and drawbacks; The great think about high technology is that it is not being rapidly made illegal and one is much freer to explore in that realm with out legal reprecussions.
Let's see having done both ; Psychedelics and High Technology each has their benefits and (uh I don't want to say drawbacks) and areas where they miss; High Tech without better and more artistic development lacks the serendipity that chemicals have; Overall it (high tech) is safer and harder to get into deep water with; But that is currently it's lack it can be quite superficial giving us repetetive video games and the like; That may bget better if people with artisitc vision get involved.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUh, it's sort of arrogant to say "I am better than those other people and that's why people should believe believe me." Beware on a tribe of deep ecotypes will descend and point out that those primative sociaieties did not threaten to destroy the planet. The bottom line is there are things that they may have grasphed that we fail to grasp.
However each method of exploration has it's features and drawbacks; The great think about high technology is that it is not being rapidly made illegal and one is much freer to explore in that realm with out legal reprecussions.
There are advantages and disadvantages to each method of exploring consciousness; The big advantage of high techology is that for a variery of reasons little in it has been made illegal. The basic lack it has so far is that it does not provide the depth of experience that the other methods of consciousness alteration do; That may be due to the fact that people have not been able to explore it as long as in the past acess to it was limited and this may improve when people of artistic vision get involved. Right now much of the use of technology to alter consciousness has been rather shallow . Whereas it is pretty clear that alterations due to certain powerful psychoactive substances have altered human consciousness a lot; Now that may be due to the fact that chemiclas especially those from or based on those from the natural environment plug into human consciousness at a deep level we don't yet undeerstand and that when we get technology that plugs into our consciouness at deeper level or perhaps technology designed and executed/used by people with more artistic vision for artistic and consciouness expansion purposes that it will catch up natural/chemical methods. Those methods have had millions of years of evolution to evolve.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisA gentle hint, uh it's not very much of an argument to say <<I am better than you and that's why you don't agree with me...>> That's alas just aggogance.
honestly. did i hear you right? rather read you right????? how is it possible for two people ( you and me)to read the same aritcle and get such opposite impressions. im not angry about it just honestly ( and no play on words here ) astonished.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYES, BUT I HONESTLY CAN SAY WITH PERSONAL ASSURANCE THAT IF YOU EVER DO EVEN A LIGHT TRIP ON PSYLOCYBIN YOU WILL SEE THAT THESE DRUGS ON SOME LEVEL AGREE WITH YOU COMPLETELY! BUT TECHNOLOGY INVENTED FOR THAT IS BAD FOR YOU. ( YOUR REFERENCE) i JUST HOPE YOUR NOT ONE OF THOSE THAT CANT TELL THAT ALTHOUGH IM USNING CAPITALS IM NOT YELLING. WHY PEOPLE GET ANGRY OVER DISAGREMENTS I SEE NO CLUE. ITS ALMOST AS IF SOME OF THAT TECHNOLOGY WAS USED TO GET US MOSTLY TO ASSUME THIS IS A GOOD STRATEGY..... THATS A TOTAL GUESS I JUST MADE? YES. SEEMS AS IF WED ALL JUST HONESTLY EXPRESS WHAT WE THINK AND FIND VIEWS OUTRAGEOUSLY ALIEN TO US JUST AS CURIOUS TO THINK ABOUT AS ANY OTHER. I NEVER SAID AGREE WITH. JUST KNOW. GOT ME??? BYE,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSTEVE
ANOTHER ONE, YOU SEEM BRIGHT..... STEVE OH AND PLEASE. THATIS ONLY AN OBSERVATION I DONT WANT TO MOVE IN WITH YOU. now really NOtice!!! previous was joke. really joke only joke only...
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI am recived letters from A. Shulgin 1980-1997 in USSR and Italy. About this see Letters from Leningrad, TIHKAL ,1997 .Konstantin Zhingel
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisUsing technology to alter chemicals to alter consciousness is what a high tech society would do. ones and zeros. The future computers will be biological and hence chemical.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSir when it comes to the area of consciousness nobody knows more than someone else. The saying "He who says he knows, doesn't and he who says I don't know, knows" is true. Maybe you should think about that and rather than remain stagnant in your acquired opinions, authority and static knowledge, try unlearning what you know and perhaps discovering something new. Ask yourself "What is the nature of intellectual humility?"
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisto @MarshallBarnes
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisInteresting that your previous comment indicated that we have the technology to expand consciousness and that is pretty much what the article is about using chemical technology. If you are referring to the advances in using focused electromagnetic radiation in altering consciousness as some experiments are now showing I think the result is the same really, both are technology and both valid.
And as @another1one stated all substances like alcohol and caffeine alter mental states (consciousness) so what the issue with chemical or electronic altered states? I don't see much of a difference.
Buddhist meditation is very old around 2500 years yet it is proving to be a consciousness altering practice that requires no chemical or electronic means to experience but some of the same effects can be seen as in chemical or technological means.
As a researcher you probably already know this and you probably already know that seeking altered states to expand a persons mental horizons is something many people seek to experience as not everything science or religion try to explain satisfies the need some people have for understanding the world we live in.
"I said that the technology exists to alter our states of consciousness, and I said it within the context of the types of alterations that were being described by powerful psychoactive drugs, not getting a coffee buzz or a beer drunk" -Marshall
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisMarshall, I'm confused by what you say. Are you saying that research and development of novel chemicals is or is not technology?
I would think that it is technology.
I First have to say I am a chemist. With that being said Alexander is one of my biggest hero's. Me myself have done quite the verity of psychedelics, and making quite a few of them. With in all of my experiences I have never had one bad trip. Every single trip i took taught me something about the world, about myself, or understand very complex math. I wont lie to yall, but yes u can abuse these drugs just like you can abuse food. Over all they have done nothing but inform me about the inter-workings of the universe.. My hat goes off to you Alexander!!!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this@MarshallBarnes,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou are one of the most closed minded people i have ever encountered. You know nothing of medicine, and the real benefits of using these psychedelic compounds. They can treat depression, bi polar, anixity, and PTSD, and also give terminal cancer patients a way to cope with death. BTW I'm in grad school for Chem so keep your close minded B.S. outta here... Thank You, TheChemMan
Dear ChemMan:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's clear that the one that should stay "outta here" is you. Your reading comprehension is below the failing grade level. I never discussed the use of drugs to treat mental illness. I care not what you claim your academic status is in school, as it is clear that you're the one who is closed minded.
First, I did independent research into the whole psychedelic as mind expansion schtick before your were born. Second, I did breakthrough work in the tech area that still stands today. Since you haven't experienced what I'm talking about and I know people who have used both psychedelics and the tech that I was working on (in fact they were part of the testing process of the R&D), I do know a whole lot more about the subject than you're in a position to. Besides, the mind altering effects of the tech can be switched off while there are no such provisions for chemicals, which is a major advantage. Second, the use of the tech doesn't show up in urine tests at the job. Third, it's not illegal. Need I go on?
Bottom line, you didn't get the memo - you're not in a position to tell me what to do nor have the brain cells to even begin to know how. So go back to school, little boy, and study harder. You clearly need to.
Oh yeah, and just say no...