Psychedelic Mushrooms Are Getting Much, Much Stronger

7 pointsposted 9 months ago
by bookofjoe

12 Comments

taylodl

9 months ago

Why?

They've made marijuana stronger, now they're making mushrooms stronger. They've been making beer stronger for some time now.

But, why?

More is not better. I want a pleasant high, I don't want to get "baked." I want a pleasant sensory experience, I don't want to go "tripping balls." I want a pleasant buzz while enjoying a couple of pints, I don't want to be "hammered." What is with this trend of taking everything too far?

ErikBjare

9 months ago

Because it's cheaper. You can adjust your dose to the potency to get whatever high you want.

altairprime

9 months ago

Number goes up disorder strikes all human drugs eventually. That’s why we have an LD50 for caffeine, that’s why we invented heroin, that’s why we grew superpot strains that are uselessly strong, and now we’re doing it to mushrooms.

It’s a classical capitalism fuckup (extra-strength! concentrated-dosage!) that laundry detergent pursued for a while, which when combined with the human desire to explore new frontiers of tripping, eventually gives us drugs that no longer serve the purpose they once did.

It’s also a sign of inexperience: cultivation is easy, wisdom is hard. I’m glad that someone is exploring the frontier but I think this is going to be a lot more effectively self-correcting than hyperpot has been. Bad trips are immediate and widespread at these levels. No duh. That’s why we didn’t do this in the nineties. Not for lack of science, but because it leads to awful experiences.

The gold ring in this contest is the lowest concentration necessary to minimize nausea.

belldrop

9 months ago

I've got some concerns about your actual familiarity with the subject.

I've grown psychedelic mushrooms and marijuana (just harvested my summer outdoor crop this past weekend!) off and on since getting a syringe of P. cubensis spores from Toronto Hemp Company back in 2004. I've grown a pretty good mix of "oldschool" varieties as well as newer strains and hybrids (marijuana and mushrooms both).

There is no such thing as "hyperpot/super pot." Weed that is so strong it can't be used does not exist. This goofy boomer fear-mongering line gained a lot of ground when more states started legalizing recreational cannabis. During my state's push towards legalization, the Republicans' favorite talking point was how much stronger weed of today is versus the 1960's. Yeah, we're a lot better at growing it these days. It's almost like sixty years of research resulted in tangible benefits! Doesn't mean everyone is out here overdosing on "super weed."

It's the same deal with mushrooms. The problem isn't that we've somehow created "super mushrooms," it's that there is a deficit of dosing information, which the linked article points out. This can be fixed with education. There are a lot of benefits to more potent mushrooms, like not puking every time you want to trip, or getting over your developed tolerance without having to eat an entire ounce of something that objectively tastes like dried cat shit.

You should probably just roll up a hyperjoint and relax.

altairprime

9 months ago

You’re welcome to read through my history if you’d like to consider my experiences in detail; you, and many others in a prior thread on HN about pot, insisted that, since some people’s reaction scales linearly with dosing concentration, that clearly everyone’s does and so therefore my outcomes of “2x strength, x^2 effect” are invalid. I just chose “hyperpot” on a whim as a convenience for typing on mobile. I don’t agree with the 70s anti-drugs fervor. I was exposed to D.A.R.E. as a kid and I thought that it was largely bullshit back then, and now. So certainly we agree that weed isn’t Satanic.

As I said, finding the minimum potency necessary to minimize the nausea is a good goal. As to the taste, well, chocolate does a fine job of masking it, but I’m certainly not averse to psychedelics that have temporary nausea as a downside. It certainly helps offset the human tendency to chase hallucinogens into oblivion. But I do respect making it less nasty.

I have the same outsized reaction to high-concentration to all sorts of pharmaceutical drugs, not just pot and shrooms. My medical record has one medication in particular now listed as an allergy, that I just assumed was “everyone suffers when they take a normal dose of it”. Turns out, no, waking hallucinations are not a normal side effect for adult doses of that medication, and we all agreed that instead of testing lower doses, we would permanently reject it and find something less complicated and lower effectiveness (which, as is usual for me by now, treated symptoms far better; sigh). They have genetic tests for some of the drugs now — apparently there’s one drug that’s potentially fatal to me if I take the standard recommended dose for my weight — so doctors are gradually fighting me less and listening to me more when prescribing medications, which has done wonders for my quality of life with drugs.

The doctors used to sound just like this, twenty and thirty years ago: “we need to get your dose up to normal”, “there’s nothing wrong with your kidney levels”, “but this is the normal dose to prevent clotting, how could it be causing significant and continuous pain, you must be making it up”, “you just want to sell half of your dose” (when I’m fighting them to the mat to lower the dose prescribed ) and so on. It taught me a lot about standing up for my experience even when I’m a statistical outlier, trivially dismissed as not within someone’s preconceived expectations and therefore not worth listening to. It also taught me a lot about how anyone can be wrong with respect to the bodily reactions of others to statistical outliers that contradict their preconception that “2x dosing strength = 2x effect” — which, while true for many, is definitely not the case for all.

Some things are fixed with education, indeed :)

belldrop

9 months ago

I don't recall saying that everyone's reaction to marijuana is the same. I took issue with your claims that "super pot strains that are uselessly strong" even exist, and especially that they are a problem in the process of "self-correcting," as you described it.

Sorry that you have an outsized reaction to drugs, that sounds incredibly frustrating and painful. It doesn't apply to most people, though, and it seems like you're expecting growers to cater more to your outlying case - when many already do. If you have an outsized reaction, make sure you know what you're ingesting, and take way less. Frankly, that's even easier with mushrooms than it is with marijuana since you're already weighing out a specific dose. If that still isn't a safe or predictable enough method then maybe mind-altering, recreational drugs are not for you. I know lots of people who can't touch the stuff for a variety of reasons. They aren't claiming that the drugs are so strong they no longer serve a purpose, though.

You would personally prefer that cultivators make less potent products. "Finding the minimum potency necessary to minimize the nausea" is a fine goal, for you. Saying that growers who don't share this goal (or also grow high potency plants/fungi in addition) lack "wisdom," or are driven by a "classical capitalism fuck up" is just a view I disagree with for a lot of reasons.

Ultimately, it's your responsibility to find a dose that works for you. There are a million ways to consume these things, at any concentration you could possibly want. There's nothing stopping you from microdosing even with high potency mushrooms, or from exploring CBD dominant weed strains. But let's not invent "super weed strain" bogeymen in the process. That's straight out of the DARE playbook; it's inaccurate and harmful to legalization efforts.

You could just say "Some pot these days is too strong for me, I wish I could find some 80's brick weed" instead and that would be a pretty reasonable, albeit uncommon, take.

altairprime

9 months ago

Tried saying that. People suggest “just consume less” as if it somehow makes high-concentration THC weed possible to consume again. It turns out that altering the characteristics of weed to prioritize “get high” THC concentration increase alters the overall ratios of components of the plant in such a way that diluted consumption still has worse outcomes. “Make it 2x and then dilute it 1/2x” is not functionally equivalent to “Make it 1x” doesn’t necessarily apply to biological products.

Welcome to HN! I hope you’ve found your first-time user experience valuable so far. Unfortunately, school consumes my time, and I’m not interested in discussing pot politics with perfect wording precision further; so this concludes my incomplete and unsatisfactory participation on these matters.

createaccount99

9 months ago

Just take less, then?

taylodl

9 months ago

Or - check this out! - you could take more if you want more of the effect you're seeking, since that's still what you have to do anyway.

h2odragon

9 months ago

is it genetic manipulation or better cultivation? or both? kinda irrelevant to the "booga booga be scared" theme.

I vaguely recall people bragging about 4% with tryptophan infused substrates, back in the day.

Fungi breeding makes plants look simple and sane. I have no doubt passionate people are advancing the state of human knowledge in that field. I do doubt their advances will so easily fit into the storylines that plant breeding has made us expect.