energyandstruct
Member
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2017
- Messages
- 960
This is something that's been bugging me about Ray's work for a little while. He claims that LSD is "approximately" a serotonin receptor antagonist.
To start with, the claim seems very broad, given how many different subtypes of serotonin receptors there are.
And its a claim that he doesn't cite, but seems central to a portion of his argument. Although the stuff about excess serotonin causing learned helplessness would stand, he is claiming (and I would agree, based on experience) that LSD and related substances cause creativity, vibrant health, and play, and then he is connecting that to serotonin antagonism.
If LSD is not generally an agonist, I don't understand why serotonin antagonists like trazodone and seroquel are generally the strongest ways to block its effects (more so than general sedatives).
[devils advocate: this could possibly be explained simply by their antihistaminic effect being sedating and possibly having weaker efficacy so that they don't have similar effects to psychedelics but block them by binding at same receptors]
I guess this could be explained by competitive binding, but then one would expect the trazodone or seroquel to have similar effects to LSD, unless they had lower efficacy. I guess some of this all goes back to ray's critique of transmitter receptor models, which I don't quite understand. i'm trying to read too much at once while sick and kinda frying my brain, but discovering these theories that say "everything you know is wrong" is a little destabilizing and I feel like I need to continue to inquire deeper...
I can't find good info that elaborates at which subtypes of receptors LSD is an agonist and/or antagonist. I would guess this would vary from tryptamines to phenethylamines, but LSD has characteristics of both, and ray chose it as an example.
One thing that seems to suggest ray is right is that LSD seems to differ strongly from more toxic serotonin releasers like mdma...
To start with, the claim seems very broad, given how many different subtypes of serotonin receptors there are.
And its a claim that he doesn't cite, but seems central to a portion of his argument. Although the stuff about excess serotonin causing learned helplessness would stand, he is claiming (and I would agree, based on experience) that LSD and related substances cause creativity, vibrant health, and play, and then he is connecting that to serotonin antagonism.
If LSD is not generally an agonist, I don't understand why serotonin antagonists like trazodone and seroquel are generally the strongest ways to block its effects (more so than general sedatives).
[devils advocate: this could possibly be explained simply by their antihistaminic effect being sedating and possibly having weaker efficacy so that they don't have similar effects to psychedelics but block them by binding at same receptors]
I guess this could be explained by competitive binding, but then one would expect the trazodone or seroquel to have similar effects to LSD, unless they had lower efficacy. I guess some of this all goes back to ray's critique of transmitter receptor models, which I don't quite understand. i'm trying to read too much at once while sick and kinda frying my brain, but discovering these theories that say "everything you know is wrong" is a little destabilizing and I feel like I need to continue to inquire deeper...
I can't find good info that elaborates at which subtypes of receptors LSD is an agonist and/or antagonist. I would guess this would vary from tryptamines to phenethylamines, but LSD has characteristics of both, and ray chose it as an example.
One thing that seems to suggest ray is right is that LSD seems to differ strongly from more toxic serotonin releasers like mdma...