Zero proof DMT is made in your head.

[The Neural]

It's probably just me alpha but it sounds engrish to me is all, I don't want a debate about it.

This has been an interesting and opinionated read, and I'm no scientist, a lot of it is over my head, but it seems to me that as the conversation goes on the skeptics are steadily losing ground. As more and more evidence is presented that seems to indicate DMT is produced in the brain (non-conclusively), the OP and the like still refuse to budge, simply because the evidence is "not conclusive", even though highly indicative.

Healthy skepticism is healthy. Cynical skepticism is cynical.

Rewind time a while, and the OP would probably be the guy going around saying "There is ZERO evidence that the world is round."

My $.02. Just sayin

But as for you sonny jim... no I will not budge and neither should anyone else until there is evidence. If everyone hadn't peddled the pineal... 'theory' .. in the first place so much...

We will respectfully give way to new evidence, welcome it with open arms. But so far, no such cigar.

You sure about that last sentence? Seems to me a few posts back you were bringing data into question over the grammar used to deliver it, and were using this as an excuse to not even consider it.

Real scientific of you.

You do you, bro, never said do otherwise, but if you want to talk science I've got somethin for you to consider, daddy o'.

Historically, we have consistently scientifically described our world based on the furthest implications of our current understanding(s), at that time in history, in whatever field of data you pick. And historically, we always find out that the picture we thought we were looking at is much bigger at some point down the line when we gain better analyzation tools and methods, and in many cases, the furthest imaginings and theorizing from a "genius" of old do not compare to the knowledge which a modern day child posesses, because although the genius had the right idea, he was wrong.

The "discovery" that 99% of our DNA is "junk" is a great example of this. This is obviously not true, but we make it true based on our very limited understanding of DNA. It's not that 99% is "junk" we have just only come to understand 1% of it so far. The junk DNA theory is in the process of being dismantled as we speak though, with some studies involving coding and modifying DNA using vibrationally tuned lazers. We will eventually come to learn how utterly wrong we were about this once we are using a better understanding as a point of contemplation.

Human history is rife with scientific conclusions being jumped to and then overturned based on better understandings as data compounds over time, so we can use that itself as "scientific data", and quite safely say that we are going to come to learn that whatever is really going on in a 'psychedelic experience' is more complex than we had ever dreamed, simply since this subject inherently involves some of the least understood concepts, scientifically speaking (consciousness/perception, dimensions, etc. etc. etc.) and at this point we actually have no idea what is really going on.

In reality, the subject of the psychedelic experience may be the most scientifically complex subject we have ever tried to make sense of as humans, and since we currently know next to nothing, there is obviously so much more to be discovered.

You say that you will not budge "until there is evidence". Well, you know what... it's very typical when dealing with complex theories to have indicators of something which can't be verified, which lead to the eventual verification of what was indicated. How about the Higgs-Boson, for example? Arguably the most important scientific discovery of all time to date. The LHC was constructed based on a plethora of indicators. We had no idea if we would really find a Higgs-Boson, it just really seemed like we would. And guess what. We found it. But if you had your way, the LHC probably would have been a "dumb idea" and you "wouldn't have budged" until you saw real evidence. If it was up to you, we never would have discovered the Higgs-Boson

We do need people like you though to attempt to shoot down everything on the leading edge so the stuff that is false and weak doesn't persist, but you would definitely be telling people the world is flat since we have no evidence of anything else, if you were around during such times with your present attitude.

Your move, bud

Very condescending, and antagonistic post. This type of competition would be better demonstrated elsewhere. Please refrain from being overly sarcastic "daddy o", "sonny jim", etc. This is a healthy debate, do not overdo it, such arduous philosophical discussions should be (if they have to) emerge on a separate thread.

 

[causmic]

I apologize. I could and should have refrained. Thank you for the response. I understand. I'll edit my post for tone.

Edit: and perhaps you could edit yours too to fully remove the previous version?

 

[The Neural]

We all remember the earth was flat once. I do not think this is Orion's misconception.

However, grammar errors (while there weren't any) are in no way indicative of the quality of their research methods, scientific enquiry or statistical analysis skillsets. Cottonwood Research Foundation provided the funding to the researchers to conduct the study that they hint towards. There is nothing posted on that blog that predicts a poor study, only that there still isn't one properly published, only accepted. It's just a teaser, which again, does not negate or validate any study. In that respect, Orion is correct that there is still nothing that shows or not whether DMT is made in the pineal, regardless of the degree this blog advertises their demonstrative skills.

Depending on the journal (Biomedical Chromatography) there may be anything from a week to 6 months to see the paper online.

 

[causmic]

We all remember the earth was flat once. I do not think this is Orion's misconception.

I suppose I'm being too general and far reaching. I don't think Orion has misconceptions as much as apprehensions or pre-conceptions. Campaign against Joe Rogan, maybe? I am simply saying we obviously have a long way to go in our understanding, and I was commenting on Orion's apparent resistance to the new information recently posted before even surveying it.

I also don't understand why Joe Rogan gets so much flack around here. He may not know what he's talking about very much, but he's talking about DMT in a way that gets people interested. I enjoy listening to his talks and experiences. He is energetic and entertaining. He is responsible for thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of people hearing about DMT. To some, it won't sound appealing, and to some it will. Joe Rogan could be the trigger that brings someone to the spice for a life changing ride, whether or not he's right in declaring it's produced in the pineal gland or involved in dreaming... who cares! The spice will speak for itself to those who are curious for it, but we all have to know about it before we can experience it.

I think it's a great thing, and I think we need more people in positions to do so bringing awareness to DMT in whatever way they can. IMO, the more attention brought to the subject, the sooner we will find out if any of that pineal gland stuff is true or not.

And sorry again for that post which I would again ask The Neural or a mod to remove. Or ban me, whatever the protocol is. Twenty-some posts deep and I'm already a condescender and a Joe Rogan lover. It's not looking good for me, is it?

I joke, and I do apologize. I haven't been getting much sleep due to recent endeavors in kitchen chemistry. I just need to break through and melt my ego down. Then I'll be fine I promise, heh :thumb_up:

Goodnite everybody.. I'm going to go hang out with Joe Rogan in hyperspace during a dream induced pineal gland DMT trip

 

[hug46]

I also don't understand why Joe Rogan gets so much flack around here.

I think one reason Joe Rogan sometimes gets flack more than someone like Terrence Mckenna is image. Joe looks and sounds like someone that, if you were to see him down the pub, you"d be worried that he would give you a slap if you looked at his drink in a manner not to his liking. Whereas Tereence mckenna looks and sounds like a well read uncle who would kindly read you a bedtime story if you couldnt sleep.
I think they are both as relevant as eachother and just appeal to different peer groups. I would like to see a Terry Mcrogan hybrid.

And i don"t really understand Orion"s problems with the grammar. The person who wrote it is probly American and they speak a different sort of English to the native English-person (even though in this case "data establish" does make sense to me, as someone pointed out data is plural of datum).

 

[Orion]

Bringing new evidence into question over the grammar used to deliver it, and using that as an excuse to not even consider it doesn't seem very welcoming, IMO.

Like I have already said It just sounded wrong to me. As I later said to a1pha it's not worth a debate, it has nothing to do with this topic.

Why do you keep suggesting that I am resisting information? The aim of this topic was to first debunk the myth which people so desperately want to be true and to pool as much solid information as possible. In future the very title of topic may no longer hold true, and if that ever happens, I welcome it. But my original points still hold true, I don't know why this is so difficult to take.

As for Joe Rogan thing you are again mistaken, I said 'Joe Rogan LOL' as a sarcastic joke because we all know a good percentage of people who even knew about this 'theory' in the first place is because of his enthusiastic rant about it where he quoted strassman saying it WAS produced in the human pineal gland which ...guess what... there is no evidence for. Hence the topic to debunk this claim and pool new information.

I suppose I'm being too general and far reaching. I don't think Orion has misconceptions as much as apprehensions or pre-conceptions

The only notion I hold onto here is that there is as of yet no proof. What's the problem ?

Now if you don't mind that's enough acidity, we are all friends here.

And for the love of spring onions can we drop the 'our new data establish' grammar correctness thing. Seems I am wrong, cheerfully withdrawn.

 

[a1pha]

Like I have already said It just sounded wrong to me. As I later said to a1pha it's not worth a debate, it has nothing to do with this topic.

It might not be worth a debate but you did question the legitimacy of the foundation over a grammatical error. Maybe we should hold back our negative personal feelings if we don't want to discuss them? Especially for a group with similar goals as the DMT-Nexus.

Keep an open mind and a positive attitude, and soak up good info and you are on the right path before you have even tried a psych.

Also nothing wrong with debating in here, this topic really puts it into perspective.

Who is this cottonwood research ? Is this their data ?

So these folks conducted the research? This website calling it 'Our' new data...

Yes, it is their data.


...
I think we will have more on topic information when the study is published.

 

[Orion]

* Withdrawn by me for being a cheeky git *

 

[The Traveler]

Joe Rogan could be the trigger that brings someone to the spice for a life changing ride, whether or not he's right in declaring it's produced in the pineal gland or involved in dreaming... who cares!

We care if something on this forum is brought as a fact while it is clear that it is still an hypothesis or personal idea.

I have said this many times before but lets say it again: On the DMT-Nexus we want to have reliable information that is supported by logical thinking and reliable sources.

If something is still an hypothesis or someones idea, then it is not allowed to bring it as fact on the DMT-Nexus. I want people to be able to trust the information coming from the DMT-Nexus, if we are not strict with this rule we will not be able to stop the proliferation of wild and reckless ideas that in the end can hurt our cause.

As such Joe Rogan was called out for presenting claims about our beloved molecule as fact while it was(is) still an hypothesis.


And please, shall we stop talking about and grammer speling errorrs?


Kind regards,

The Traveler

 

[AnAngelicProcess]

I've had a lot of personal experiences that would point to DMT being in the brain.


However, I cannot accept this as fact until there is tangible evidence put forth that it is indeed created in our brains.

 

[kryptofinania]

I think that Joe Rogan, the allround specialist and pier certified spokeman on DMT should make a public statement. I was not 5 minutes away from digging into the bridge of my nose with a spoon. This is some seriously dangerous misinformation!!!

hAHAHAHAAHAHAHAA

 

[General Gypsy]

I am interested in the two studies that are set for publication.

One says to have proven that DMT is is produced in the brains of rats, the other says it was found to be produced in the brains of primates. But I will await peer review to see what can be gleaned and accepted from these studies. But the preliminary findings seem to once again be leaning towards DMT in the Pineal.

http://www.cottonwoodresearch.org/dmt-pineal-2013/ - Rats findings.

Trying to find the one on Primates I was reading last week.

 

[Parshvik Chintan]

i think if it were shown to be produced in primates we would have heard about it.

afaik the only thing they discovered was INMT immunoreactivity in primate nervous tissue (all three places they tested)

 

[endlessness]

Why are people so focused on DMT anyways? 5-MeO-DMT and bufotenine are also endogenous psychoactives and nobody seems to look for them or think they are important? Or other beta carbolines or cannabinoids or opiates or a host of substances also present in our bodies, are they not important for our birth, death, spontaneous spiritual experiences, etc?

and let's say that DMT is shown to be produced the pineal.. then what? What can we conclude from it appart from..... it being produced the pineal? Im sure a lot of people would immediately think this proves DMT is released at birth and death, but that's a whole different kind of speculation of course.

DMT is also produced in the lungs, at least INMT enzyme is there... Is there be a spiritual significance too, and if so, why is it never discussed (for example, pranayama or other breathing techniques and the relationship to possible DMT production there) ?

Just a few things that pop to mind...

Sometimes this pineal story seems a bit fetish-ish (lol) , and Im not seeing a lot of other interesting questions being asked

 

[fastfred]

Regarding science, yeah sure science changes and I never said its absolute proof that DMT isnt produced in the brain, but evidence so far seems to point against it.

Endlessness, you're placing WAY too much weight on a single study that failed to find INMT transcripts in the brain.

The site where it would have the most active effect would be exactly the site you would expect it to be the most highly regulated. Failing to find INMT transcripts there, in that particular culture, at that particular time, under those particular conditions... really means nothing at all. Certainly nothing worth using to fuel an argument.

All that study shows is that that they didn't find INMT transcripts in the brain when they shouldn't have. All it shows is that INMT production is well regulated in the brain. To me, that is more indicative that it IS produced in the brain than not.

If the brain were dribbling out DMT producing enzymes all the time then it couldn't be very sensitive to DMT, that is the response would have to be weaker to compensate for the transcript leakage.

In any case, it's important to remember that all a cDNA analysis shows is what transcripts are there in a particular culture with the particular age and conditions involved. Trying to broaden that to any larger conclusion is not supported. Trying to claim that study shows DMT is not produced in the brain is like claiming your well has run dry because no water is coming out of your (turned off) faucet.

Do a study using tissue undergoing birth, death, OOBE, REM sleep, psychosis, or any of the other proposed DMT-related states... and then it might make sense to try and draw some conclusions.

It should also probably be pointed out that post-transcriptional regulation could knock down transcripts while you're busy extracting or blotting the RNA. So a negative result doesn't even necessarily mean that it's not being produced.


-FF

P.S. Please don't take any of this as dissing you, I enjoy reading your posts and respect your intellect.

 

[Infundibulum]

i think if it were shown to be produced in primates we would have heard about it.

afaik the only thing they discovered was INMT immunoreactivity in primate nervous tissue (all three places they tested)

Yup, even though this was part of a poster presentation and has not been published in peer reviewed journals. Even if their results still hold valid, presence of INMT in the pineal does not imply that dmt is produced in the pineal (it really doesn't imply it).

We are still waiting for the publication that (according to the press conference) demonstrates dmt synthesis, or was that merely presence(?) in the pineal.

I also agree with Endlessness' post - we shouldn't probably giving too much focus on dmt and disfavour the other endogenous psychedelics....

 

[fastfred]

presence of INMT in the pineal does not imply that dmt is produced in the pineal (it really doesn't imply it).

Can you explain that statement? Seems pretty unlikely to me that INMT would not = DMT.


-FF

 

[The Neural]

presence of INMT in the pineal does not imply that dmt is produced in the pineal (it really doesn't imply it).

Can you explain that statement? Seems pretty unlikely to me that INMT would not = DMT.


-FF

Should MHiRB contain/produce Scatole just because there is DMT in it?
That logic is erroneous.

Take this as an example on why the presence of a substance does not necessarily imply the presence of such a specific metabolite of that substance.

 

[goodnessgracious]

Apol's if this has been said but i haven't read thro' the whole thread BUT surely the question of where DMT resides in the body or if it does is surpassed by the fact that there are receptors in the brain that the molecule attaches its self, why would that receptor exist if NN DMT wasnt in the body?

 

[Vodsel]

surely the question of where DMT resides in the body or if it does is surpassed by the fact that there are receptors in the brain that the molecule attaches its self, why would that receptor exist if NN DMT wasnt in the body?

Because those receptors have many agonists besides DMT. The fact DMT binds to them does not imply their only purpose is receiving DMT.