Talk:Anadenanthera peregrina/Archives/2020/February

Untitled
Some charlatan keeps editting the Anadenanthera articles to indicate that bufotenine reacts with calcium hydroxide to form "calcium bufotenate". This is a complete falsehood. The person responsible has also posted about the topic on messageboards, and created multiple fake accounts to "substantiate" his information. If you see this info re-posted, please delete it.

There is some indication that bufotenine undergoes a chemical change in the presence of calcium hydroxide, but it is known definitively that calcium bufotenate is too unstable a compound to be isolated. After treating pure freebase bufotenine with calcium hydroxide, all of the calcium hydroxide can be recovered; no calcium salt of bufotenin has been isolated. The bufotenine that was treated this way [i]does[/i] seem to have an activity profile distinct from bufotenin.

But it is not calcium bufotenate ("Ca-O-DMT"). That's someone's persistent crusade of misinformation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.170.56.109 (talk) 19:38, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Looks like an entry taken from another encyclopedia. Plus, the in text citations have no references. Needs to be rewritten. --Stormwriter 16:04, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I thought aboriginals were from Australia, not the Caribbean.

--- 'Aboriginal' can normally refer to anyone who's people lived in an area before colonialism. In a sence, even celtic people in the UK are 'aboriginal'. Sakanagaijin (talk) 14:32, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Smoke
I have no idea if this has a place on wikipedia, but as far as I'm aware, the plant is also smoked. The effects simply feel like a 'buzz', strange lucid dreams and feeling very sociable or talkative.

'''In reviewing the ethnographic literature, I've only found the practice of smoking to be reported for Anadenathera colubrina. That fact might have a place on the A colubrina article, as there appears to be an uninterrupted tradition of the ritual smoking of the seeds in Argentina dating back at least 4500 years''' —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.170.58.198 (talk) 20:23, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

The idea of putting 'mild cannabis like high' seems like too much of a cliché, however, it does seem to provide similar effects at high doses (about 10 seeds). If anyone wants to write this in (I'm no good at this kinda thing) I'll include a short meathod;

1. The brown coating is taken off the beans

2. The beans are the either cut into small peices or ground, but not into a powder.

3. The peices are then put into a joint with tabacco or similar material, sometimes mixed with marijuana.

4. The 'joint' is smoked like a normal marijuana joint.

A standard dose would be 3 - 4 beans to produce a mild high.

Side effects include feeling a bit thirsty, metabolic rate seems to speed up (feeling hungry) and in some cases people's feet have a mind of thier own (a common side effect of Hawaiian baby woodrose).

I think smoking these beans is seen as more accsessable than snuff. The reason being that the 'joint' can be passed around in social context, it's easyer to prepare (without having to grind to dust) and the fact that it's never a good idea to put things up your nose comes into the debate. Sakanagaijin (talk) 14:32, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Requested move
Yopo → Anadenanthera peregrina — Per discussion at Talk:WikiProject:Psychedelics...#Anadenanthera genus. 'oac' (old american century) | Talk 04:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * This article has been renamed as the result of a move request. --Stemonitis 07:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

More Pictures!
We need some pictures of the beans and of the preparation of the snuff by shamans as well as pictures of it in use. --Ron Delipski 01:08, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

DMT and 5-MeO-DMT Rumors on Wikipedia!
Sophisticated modern tests have proven over and over again that both DMT and 5-MeO-DMT appear in such small amounts in the beans that they have little or no effect in the snuff. Please don't add anymore false claims of DMT or 5-MeO-DMT being the main active compound. I've seen dozens of tests that show that bufotenine is by far the main active compound and that the beans contain very little DMT and 5-MeO-DMT. Even modern tests performed by the DEA in the US report this to be the case. I haven't seen a single study done with modern equipment that proves otherwise. The Wikipedia article on DMT still has this false claim and it needs to be fixed. I'll go fix it. If there is any other place with this false claim, please fix it! --Ron Delipski 01:08, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

References Cited Incompletely in "Active Constituents" Section
Noticed that the format of the references 11-29 did not have sufficient information for identification/verification. In addition, does the article really need 18 references to backup the point that "only bufotenin is present in active amounts in the beans"? If it does, we need more bibliographic information on the sources so that they can be verified. Rhode Island Red 04:52, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Those references are from Ott's work and they are incomplete. I don't think they are needed. If needed, they could be substituted with countless references from other work. It would be nice if someone can cite references in opposition to these. I'm sure at least a few tests show different results. Chemical extraction and identification is an art form. Which chemicals get extracted depend highly on the solvents used. For example, an extraction using heptane would show little or no bufotenin present at all, while an extraction using chloroform would show a large amount of bufotenin. The DEA in the US uses chloroform typically. Their tests show bufotenin to be the only compound present in active amounts. Ott's tests also used chloroform. This is where you need to be careful. Anyone can do an extraction using heptane and then publish their results showing that the seeds contain little or no bufotenin. Chloroform is less selective, that’s why the DEA uses it. It extracts tons of different chemicals. But in order for a test to be accurate it must be done using several different solvents to make sure that you are not simply testing which compounds were selectively extracted by a particular solvent. Ron Delipski 03:07, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Article Quality
Noticed some serious problems with this article. The bufotenin section goes into way too much detail; there is already an article on bufotenin, where this information would be more appropriately included. However, there are also many claims that are unreferenced, are referenced incompletely (without page numbers), are not supported by the sources cited, or are simply contentious and not supported by the body of exisiting literature (i.e. minority POV/fringe theories at best). It would be nice to see these problems resolved and the article shortened considerably. Excessive detail detracts from readability and makes for a non-encyclopedic article. Consider that the article should appeal to a reasonably wider audience. Rhode Island Red 16:48, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

In particular, the speculation on calcium bufotenate: it's a chemically sound hypothesis, but at the moment there is only a few scant bits of information to support the idea. Based both on chemistry and reported pharmacology, it is my belief that this compound exists, but it's irresponsible to include as fact at this point, especially with no references whatsoever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.170.67.25 (talk)

"Known in urban cultures as a cheap way to get high." I'm not sure why, but I think this needs rephrasing. It seems informal and/or unprofessional. 24.149.43.58 (talk) 13:22, 29 April 2014 (UTC)

15:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Seven years later and the page is still looking terrible. Mere Mortal (talk) 17:13, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Non-traditonal Preperations
This is not a drug extraction info page. Keep kitchen drug-extraction recipies off of it! If you need to add information about new-age preperations, it must include a citation from a reputable news source or scientific journal. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.104.198.245 (talk) 02:36, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Anadenanthera peregrina. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071213093902/http://www.ibama.gov.br/ojs/index.php/braflor/article/view/89/88 to http://www.ibama.gov.br/ojs/index.php/braflor/article/view/89/88
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130219223907/http://sun.ars-grin.gov:8080/npgspub/xsql/duke/plantdisp.xsql?taxon=72 to http://sun.ars-grin.gov:8080/npgspub/xsql/duke/plantdisp.xsql?taxon=72
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120205184910/http://deposit.ddb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?idn=981893406&dok_var=d1&dok_ext=pdf&filename=981893406.pdf to http://deposit.ddb.de/cgi-bin/dokserv?idn=981893406&dok_var=d1&dok_ext=pdf&filename=981893406.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:37, 12 October 2016 (UTC)