lorax said:
...its just a shame that bodily fluids are forbidden...
This is quite off topic. Apologies.
As far as legality of dmt is concerned, I have yet to hear of a conviction solely based on extraction/possession of dmt. No good info on sentences solely for such offences can be easily found . SWIM's lawyer believes that a good lawyer can "push" the point in the court that should this X person is sentenced for possession of dmt, then virtually all people should be sentenced accordingly for carrying class A / schedule I substances in their bodies.
Something similar happened in UK few years back where possession of fresh (not dried) mushrooms was deemed not illegal on the (quite silly in my opinion) grounds that one cannot determine the amount of psilocybin and psilocin on fresh specimens so one cannot be prosecuted for carrying potentially totally inactive mushrooms. This loophole was used for legal selling of fresh mushrooms from headshops before the law changed to include both fresh and dried ones.