Verification needed,possible mescaline

[Changafarian]

Hi there,recently a friend and I came upon a wild growing cacti aswell as in both our gardens but differing we believe could be mescal but just to clarify i want to send a few pics just to make sure it is as most characteristics is there as we are thinking of combining in a brew.

1st one the wild growing one we found
2nd one growing in friends garden(with the cool snail happening to be there)
3rd one in my garden(though im skeptical on the #rd one there might be something i missed so for in case)

Any insight would be greatly appreciated and thanks

 

[۩]

I would throw #1 and #2 into a big pot and brew.

#3 I would just leave there to grow. I don't know what it is. Looks cool.

 

[Changafarian]

Thanks alot,will share on the magic soon theres brewing to do

with 3 its the thorns and shape that kind of make it a difficult one to me we suspect it might be a peruvian torch but im not qaulified to state that for sure but so far so quick the help has been great thanks again

 

[Ilex]

#1 and 2 look like they are probably Trichocereus. #3 could be Myrtillocactus geometrizans, which is reported as a mescaline containing species, though it probably only contains small amounts.

 

[dg]

i agree w/ Ilex and House
1 is what i'd call a typical t.Peruvianus- 2 looks like a t.pachanoi
3 appears to be non active "blue candle"

i'd propagate #1

 

[Spiral Eye]

I would throw #1 and #2 into a big pot and brew.

#3 I would just leave there to grow. I don't know what it is. Looks cool.

Agreed. The way I tell a San Pedro or Peruvian Torch is by the length and thickness of the spines. The active cacti that I have encountered tend to have spines no longer than 1/4 inch long, usually pretty thin...

 

[AlbertKLloyd]

,recently a friend and I came upon a wild growing cacti aswell as in both our gardens but differing we believe could be mescal

Mescal is not an accurate term and is very confusing. The plants are not mescal and the use of that word for peyote is problematic. The term is usually used for alcoholic drinks made from agaves that are not at all psychedelic and do not contain mescaline.

The answers given so far are accurate, the last plant is not a trichocereus or echinopsis while the first two are.

 

[Changafarian]

Mescal is not an accurate term and is very confusing. The plants are not mescal and the use of that word for peyote is problematic. The term is usually used for alcoholic drinks made from agaves that are not at all psychedelic and do not contain mescaline.


Apologies for using the wrong term wasn't aware of this difference but thanks for shedding even more light and thanks to you guys for contributing through the possible confusion,so #3 will remain untouched,would it be a waste of plant to mix into a cocktail like brew if it indeed has traces of mescaline as you stated ilex or is mescaline straight down to the point just mescaline regardless from which species it is taken?just getting in on facts if there is variety with strains when it comes to cacti aswell?

 

[Ilex]

Mescaline is mescaline, but every type of cactus will also have its own flavour. It's not just mescaline in there, after all - there can be other alkaloids and a host of other phytochemicals. Every plant has a unique chemical makeup.

The main thing is, although the blue candle cactus may have mescaline in it, there's so little there that you would likely need to concentrate a huge amount of cactus to get a dose. San Pedro, or peruvian torch, are good species because they have a relatively high amount of mescaline in them. The trick with cacti (I find) is being able to ingest enough, I always run up against the limits of my stomach revolting at the bitter taste (even with highly reduced tea).

 

[Changafarian]

The trick with cacti (I find) is being able to ingest enough, I always run up against the limits of my stomach revolting at the bitter taste (even with highly reduced tea)

you have a good point ill keep this in mind with further cacti trials