Talk:N,N-Dimethyltryptamine/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1 Archive 2

Hallucinogenic Fish

There is no mention of the hypothesised role DMT plays in the toxixcity of hallucinogenic fish. There is a link to the article here, but no reciprocal link back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.68.71.4 (talk) 21:17, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

The closest thing to the psychedelic fish you mentioned, is the coral paramuricea chamaeleon, which contain DMT and indoles. Corals are animals, and live in the sea. Maybe you were thinking of kyphosus fuscus, the "dreamfish", which is a fish that contains 5-MeO-DMT. The effects of 5-MeO-DMT and DMT are very, very different though. Do not confuse them with each others. KaosMuppet (talk) 15:27, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

There are some disturbing links that lead to content showing people demonstrating how to make (extract) DMT. One such is the link to a YouTube video of a person making DMT from scratch at home. These links are disturbing, and potentially dangerous, as church-going children could be reading this article and clicking on those links and finding out how to create a fresh batch of DMT. Thank good that I reported the YouTube video in the link below. --2602:30A:2CB9:4AA0:B92F:B08A:1E64:4295 (talk) 04:12, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Are you serious?

WP:UNDUE

It is UNUDE weight to call out, in a quotebox nonetheless, a particular user's self cited hallucination from a non reliably published source. There is no indication that anyone considers this a standard effect of the substance.-- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 10:35, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

No one is claiming it is a standard effect. It is included as an example. Where else in the article do we give an example of the subjective effects? WP:UNDUE relates to viewpoints held by groups of people, and is not relevant here as it can only be held that there are the same number of viewpoints of DMT hallucinations as there are individuals who have taken the drug. We are thus not lending weight to one viewpoint in opposition to a viewpoint held by a greater number of people.--Pontificalibus (talk) 10:59, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
yes you are, you have no reliable sources placing McKenna as representative of the academic view of what are common effects. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:12, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I claim it is a standard effect of DMT. The machine elves are very much a part of the generic DMT experience. I have met with them at numerous occations, and McKeenas description of them is fairly accurate. And, of course this is subjective. It's not like a DMT smoker ever will be able to give you evidence of their existence, beyond her or his own testimony. KaosMuppet (talk) 14:06, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
you can claim all you want, but neither you nor your elves are a reliable source. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 14:10, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I believe that this claim is almost univseral among people that have taken sufficient large dosages of vaporized or intravenous DMT. Stephen Szára, Terence McKenna, Peter Meyer (arguably influenced by the McKeena's though) and Rick Strassman have reported about the machine elves, or gnomes, that are encountered while under the influence. These are people that wikipedia can quote, and also did quote in the now deleted machine elf-article. Besides from them, also conspiracy theorist Alex Jones have talked about the machine elves and the Illuminati/New World Order :-) I do not think there will be a scientific description of the elves or the alien dimensions encountered inside the DMT-sensorium anytime soon, but maybe it's okay to mentioning it anyways? It is part of our culture, or at least some of our cultures. KaosMuppet (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
When you start putting forth Alex Jones as your reliable sources, you KNOW you are in trouble. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 15:17, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
I did not put Alex Jones in among the reliable sources! Notice the "Besides from them,"-prefix, and the ":-)"-suffix, which enclose the referenced sentence in something like a joyous kvasi-equivalent of a paranthesis! I mention him because I want to point at how the idea of machine elves have crept out of the DMT-smokers world, and entered more or less "mainstream" culture. KaosMuppet (talk) 15:21, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
It has already been decided that the Machine Elf article merges here... that short McKenna quote would probably suffice to illustrate the notion all by itself. Keep that, if any of it.—Machine Elf 1735 15:37, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
an AfD cannot mandate what and how content is covered in the new article, all it says is "nope, not a stand alone article here". The content has been merged here and now the discussions must be based on WP:RS as always and on WP:UNDUE how relevant the merged content is in respect to this article and how it is viewed in the context of this article. In the context of Dimethyltryptamine, McKenna's crackpot "machine elves" are minuscule, they are merely a fraction of the coverage about hallucinations about "intelligent beings" which are merely a fraction of the hallucinations experienced which is merely a portion of the effects of the drugs which is merely a portion of everything about the drug. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 17:32, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
It is not a crackpot excentricity of the McKeenas. All (2 of them) scientists that have made experiments on test subjects with this drug, report that their subjects experienced intelligent beings visiting them. These beings have been referenced by numerous others, among them the McKeena brothers. At a minimum, I think this article should at least mention that people experience visitations from intelligent beings while under the influence of inhaled or IV DMT, with references to Stephen Száras and Rick Strassmans studies, and also that the very recognized cultural icon Terence McKenna named these beings "machine elves". (Question: Is it wrong to include peoples subjective experiences of this drug, if their experiences are rather similiar in theme, even if it is not verified with hard facts, beyond mutually independent testimonies, that these experiences actually occurred? Also, may I please ask you to look beyond your possible contempt of drug users and evaluate this machine elf-dialogue in a clear light?) KaosMuppet (talk) 13:13, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
DMT distorts the user's senses. Nothing perceived while under the influence of DMT qualifies as evidence of the existence of anything. At most it may suggest the effects DMT may have on the human brain - what parts of the brain DMT affects etc. To conclude that DMT causes a certain hallucination in users, you have to design a careful experiment that controls as many variables as possible. - Doctorx0079 (talk) 13:16, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
My "contempt" is for the use of unreliable sourcing and the pushing of personal experiences and idiosyncratic personality's views to be over-represented against our policy of WP:NPOV. -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 21:43, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Ok, change it to something you think most people accept. I have argued for this far enough. KaosMuppet (talk) 02:10, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
Just to be absolutely clear, there is NO reason to believe that "people experience visitations from intelligent [non-human] beings" by using DMT. - Doctorx0079 (talk) 03:26, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
I know this. It just felt odd to have a huge article about a drug that mentions everything about it, except the feeling and what one experience, when doing it. Just because you see a machine elf *crystal clear* right in front of you, is not proof of their non-contextual independent existence. My argument is just that it is what one often experience, and that it is embedded in the DMT-culture, and should therefore be mentioned. (It is not my intention of revitalizing this discussion again, I think the pro-machine elf camp lost, and that the mentioning of them moved to the Terence McKeena-article, see comment below.) KaosMuppet (talk) 16:24, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
Most of the material appears in the Terence McKenna article and because it cannot be successfully merged into a science article, I'm redirecting Machine elf to Terence McKenna#Machine elves.—Machine Elf 1735 05:30, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
MacKennas work has been overpublicised (IMO)- however a small quote could be justified, as he is clearly associated with the topic.
The hallucinations of "Machine Elfs" are a 'standard' feature of the DMT hallucinations. The review by Luke "Luke, D. (2011), Discarnate entities and dimethyltryptamine (DMT)" makes this fairly clear, with multiple researchers stating the same reports from subjects - of semi-humanoid alien, fantastical of elf-like creatures.
IMO opinion it is best in context to describe these things as "hallucinations" - AFAIK there is no evidence that the "machine elfs" are anything other than a hallucination.83.100.174.82 (talk) 13:27, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Someone defaced the boiling point

I have seen it in the past 5 min here as 300+ and 600+ it should be MUCH lower regardless of F or C, somewhere like 60C — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.104.248.206 (talk) 22:48, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

If someone did that it would show up on the History page. - Doctorx0079 (talk) 12:16, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Machine Elves

I re-added some valid information that was lost when Machine Elves was converted to a redirect.

I have used the section heading "Machine Elves" as it seems the commonly accepted term.

The paper Discarnate_entities_and_dimethyltryptamine_DMT_Psychopharmacology_phenomenology_and_ontology appears reliable, and is a review of several researches into the effects of the drug.

It seems that "humanoid or semi-humanoid" halluncinations are common to this chemical, as is clearly stated in the paper (p.34 & p.36). perhaps MacKenna's "Machine Elves" attract a certain amount of crackpot-speculation, and works referencing only them should be treated with some caution.

83.100.174.82 (talk) 13:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC) ""perhaps"? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom 13:28, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

I wouldn't consider that journal to be reliable at all. Even look at its wikipedia article (here's a link to the current version of the article I'm looking at). BrianPansky (talk) 07:26, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Piezoluminescence

IT is noted in some books that this substance exhbiti these traits, are there any experminteal sources for this thesis?--Namaste@? 13:59, 25 December 2016 (UTC)

Inaccuracies in most recent revision

This is regarding the following revision: 10:38, 29 April 2017‎ Trizmegistus

The text currently states: "N,N-Dimethyltryptamine (DMT or N,N-DMT) is a tryptamine molecule which naturally occurs in many plants,[3] and is produced by the pineal gland of certain mammals.[4] It has been labeled the "spirit molecule"[5] due to its role in the induction of dreaming, near death experiences, and producing vivid visionary states which may be linked to mystical or religious experiences.[6][7]"

Reference 3: "Enzymatic Formation of Psychotomimetic Metabolites from Normally Occurring Compounds" has to do with enzymes present in rabbit lung that N-Methylate compunds in vivo and his nothing to do with the occurrence of DMt in plants.

Reference 4: "LC/MS/MS analysis of the endogenous dimethyltryptamine hallucinogens, their precursors, and major metabolites in rat pineal gland microdialysate" The authors of this paper make it very clear that the fact they found DMT to be present in the pineal gland of rats does not demonstrate that this compound is produced by the pineal and proposes follow up research to investigate if that is the case.

Reference 5: "DMT Is Everywhere: A Conversation With 'Spirit Molecule' Director Mitch Schultz". A huffington post article interviewing a documentary director is not a very good reference for this claim as the title "the spirit molecule" was actually assigned to DMT by Dr. Rick Strassman in his book aptly titled "DMT: The Spirit Molecule" a reference to the book would be much more appropriate here.

Reference 6: "A proposed mechanism for the visions of dream sleep" This paper is a hypothesis, it presents no evidence that DMT is any way involved with dreaming, near death, or mystical experiences. It is instead a hypothesis suggesting an investigation into whether or not DMT as well as other tryptamines and beta-carbolines are involved with the dreaming process.

Reference 7: "MAPS - The Second Coming of Psychedelics" Make a couple offhand mentions of the John Hopkins studies on psilocybin in relation to mystical experiences. This article makes no mention of near death experiences, dreaming, or religious experience.

I don't have an account and am having trouble editing this myself, as simple rollback to a previous version should be a simple way to correct this misinformation

65.130.75.125 (talk) 20:04, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

I have removed most of it as it is not WP:MEDRS. This article needs much work. Sizeofint (talk) 04:09, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on N,N-Dimethyltryptamine. 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).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:42, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 11 November 2018

Request from sock of blocked user

The page should be reverted to the version posted by ElfMatrix at 07:12 11 November 2018. The current version is lacking in quality, for example, under "Dependace Liability," the current version only says, "DMT is illegal in many countries," which has nothing to do with dependance liability. The "Subjective Effects" section of this version is missing. I do not see anything wrong with describing the subjective effects of a drug, given that they are labelled as such. The lede should be returned completely to the original version, but at the very least, it should be noted that DMT acts as a powerful psychedelic drug when consumed. There is nothing unencyclopedic about that. Also in the lede, DMT should not be refereed to as "dangerous" without providing a proper source.

Since the previous version stood for days unchanged, I do not believe this new version should stand until adequate discussion has taken place in the talk pages. The new version removes large chunks of text which have no reason to be removed. MachineLesson (talk) 16:41, 11 November 2018 (UTC) (Sock of blocked user)

Considering your very first edit is to arrive at this talk page in support of a blocked user, I admit I'm just a little bit suspicious of this requested edit. Allow me to say that anyone abusing multiple accounts can be discovered with the appropriate checks. Existing blocks upon edit warring editors can and will be extended if abuse of multiple accounts is found. There's also strong evidence of abuse of multiple accounts in the thread above at this talk page involving the same editors. Perhaps it's time for a sockpuppet investigation to see who qualifies to edit here before we discuss article changes eh? Start discussing the proposed agreed version here at the talk page instead or we'll end up heading down the investigation path next to weed the basic problems out. I've withdrawn your requested edit... new editors just don't rush to these kinda things. And I'm calling your abuse of multiple accounts out. -- Longhair\talk 17:00, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Protected edit request on 11 November 2018

Request from sock of blocked user

The page should be reverted to the version posted by ElfMatrix at 07:12 11 November 2018. The current version is lacking in quality, for example, under "Dependace Liability," the current version only says, "DMT is illegal in many countries," which has nothing to do with dependance liability. The "Subjective Effects" section of this version is missing. I do not see anything wrong with describing the subjective effects of a drug, given that they are labelled as such. The lede should be returned completely to the original version, but at the very least, it should be noted that DMT acts as a powerful psychedelic drug when consumed. There is nothing unencyclopedic about that. Also in the lede, DMT should not be refereed to as "dangerous" without providing a proper source.

Since the previous version stood for days unchanged, I do not believe this new version should stand until adequate discussion has taken place in the talk pages. The new version removes large chunks of text which have no reason to be removed. MimosaForest2 (talk) 17:33, 11 November 2018 (UTC) (Sock of blocked user)

Seconding this. Enigmaman, I understand WP:WRONGVERSION and all but the stable version was here, with an additional 35k of text, before the edit war began. The current version is highly POV. At very minimum the description of DMT as "dangerous" in the lead paragraph must be removed. I would say it must be sourced, but I'm sure no source exists to support that statement. Snuge purveyor (talk) 19:53, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Since it was seconded, I will make the adjustment. Enigmamsg 22:17, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
I protected it at whatever version it was when I saw the request at RfPP. I did not choose this particular version. Enigmamsg 22:18, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
[1] and [2] are two sources that describe DMT as dangerous. Especially for those individuals with mental health history, [3] and [4]. There are more. Perhaps it is debatable - but, clearly the issue of safety is not settled. Additionally, this version (added by a banned sock) is filled (as User:Risentheft pointed out) with magic mushrooms, parallel dimensions, spirits, and extraterrestrial entities. Risentheft notes this version, "..promotes casual usage of an illegal and dangerous drug." I believe they are right and I would advocate for a return of the previous version, not this ad for an illegal drug. ​Ifnord (talk) 23:49, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
Two users insist the other version is better so I'm not sure what you would have me do. Prior to Risen's editing, the prior version had been here for months, correctly or not. Enigmamsg 00:12, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
I'm not sure why this compound would be inherently dangerous beyond its hallucinogenic properties, unless there's some form of pharmacodynamic mechanism that induces neurotoxicity, cytotoxicity, or organ damage that we haven't covered+cited to an appropriate (i.e., WP:MEDRS-quality) citation in the article. This compound is an endogenous biomolecule which is synthesized in human cells where AADC and INMT are co-expressed, so IMO we'd need a rather authoritative source to elaborate on why exogenous DMT is "dangerous" if that assertion is to be included. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 07:28, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Comment

I will be keeping an eye on this page and if the edit-warring resumes after the protection expires, I will be forced to make it a lengthy protection. Enigmamsg 22:20, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

I've already filed sockpuppet investigations against those here who feel it necessary to abuse multiple accounts. One editor won't be returning after being found out. Discuss, collaborate... from today. :D -- Longhair\talk 00:45, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Ref error

Please un-bork this: N,N-Dimethyltryptamine#cite note-Dmt: the Spirit Molecule-21 Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 00:01, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

I reverted to an earlier version before someone messed up the references. Enigmamsg 00:09, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merge with N,N-Dimethyltryptamine:

Repetition of existing, much longer/better quality article. After merging the information (if any needs to be merged), I propose that this (insert: the other article) be deleted rather than redirected, given that the addition of ":" after the article title is not a common typo. DannyS712 (talk) 20:36, 13 November 2018 (UTC) Updated --DannyS712 (talk) 20:37, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

There's nothing to merge. I have simply redirected N,N-Dimethyltryptamine:, which appears to have been created by mistake with the colon in the title, to N,N-Dimethyltryptamine. ChemNerd (talk) 20:46, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Edit request

I have 2 different edit requests:

  1. That a protection icon be included on the article page, as this page is currently fully protected
  2. That a {{merge from}} template be included, given the section above proposing a merger

--DannyS712 (talk) 20:42, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

FWIW, N,N-Dimethyltryptamine: should be deleted because that page name contains a typo. This page probably does need to have the full protection icon or banner added to it though. Seppi333 (Insert 2¢) 07:33, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 Not done: The page's protection level has changed since this request was placed. You should now be able to edit the page yourself. If you still seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:58, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Archived content

Could someone explain to me why the section "Pseudoscience" was placed in the archive? The discussion there, while immature, seems useful in the sense that an obvious shill is exposed and dealt with. If someone such as Risentheft reappears, it would be useful to have that discussion as visible as possible for reference... Pinecode (talk) 02:17, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Focus on neurogenesis, not intoxication.Hpfeil (talk) 01:46, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

I don't know how to translate this article into layman's terms. Please forward to an expert who can rewrite and incorporate it into the wiki article. Thank you.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-11-amazonian-tea-formation-neurons.html

"This capacity to modulate brain plasticity suggests that it has great therapeutic potential for a wide range of psychiatric and neurological disorders, including neurodegenerative diseases."

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41398-020-01011-0


Morales-Garcia, J.A., Calleja-Conde, J., Lopez-Moreno, J.A. et al. N,N-dimethyltryptamine compound found in the hallucinogenic tea ayahuasca, regulates adult neurogenesis in vitro and in vivo. Transl Psychiatry 10, 331 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-020-01011-0


Hpfeil (talk) 01:46, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Focus on everything. Not on a bias. You want neurogenesis but also to kill people due to cirrhosis of the liver (if you take this pills..., because we cannot find these plants in the city; and the ones we have have small amounts of N,N-Dimethyltryptamine). Mention everything as it is! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:587:4107:3A00:54DE:1A26:8F30:9C0B (talk) 04:21, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Rewrite and Reorganization

This article is informative, but when comparing to other psychedelic substances wikipedia.(Psilocybin mushroom) It becomes apparent that this article contains a bias towards it. There is a section outlining methods and dosages of administration, while other psychedelic articles include it; the information is redundant in the case of this article, the article deviates in format from other psychedelic. There is at least one source that is just a forum, however this isn't to say all the sources are bad or all of the article is written poorly. It seems like between informative content about cultural impact, medical use, historical origins and legal status is an underlying bias and pseudoscience. WP:NPOV

Duplo surrogate (talk) 17:56, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:N,N-Dimethyltryptamine/Archive_2&oldid=1137031084"