Talk:Lophophora
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
mescaline content
[edit]it says in the article that the mescaline content in dried peyote can reach 7%. but isn't that in fact the total alkaloid content? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.113.82.240 (talk) 20:37, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
Species - differences in psychoactivity
[edit]Note a discrepancy in this sentence under the section Species, L. diffusa: "Several people have reported that this cactus is psychoactive if ingested, though the experience is not unlike peyote."
Based on anecdotal reports, and because pellotine is described as having a qualitatively different effect than mescaline, I am pretty sure the sentence should instead read, "Several people have reported that this cactus is psychoactive if ingested, though the experience is unlike peyote." (note the change from "not unlike" to "unlike").
"Pellotine was manufactured and sold as a sleeping aid by Boeringer and Sons in Germany and tested as a hypnotic on a total of several hundred patients in Europe (Jolly, 1896, 1896a; Pilcz, 1896) and the United States (Hutchings, 1897).
However, the later discovery and marketing by the Bayer Company of a series of inexpensive synthetic barbiturates like Veronal (barbital) in 1904, and Luminal (phenobarbital) in 1911, two of pharmacology's all time blockbuster drugs, made the costly and tedious isolation of pellotine from Lophophora williamsii impractical."[1]
A sedative or barbiturate does not characterize mescaline, according to most bio-assay reports I have read (or my first-hand experience, for that matter). Therefore, I'm going to change the wording of that particular sentence accordingly.giggle 01:43, 16 February 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gregory.george.lewis (talk • contribs)
References
[edit]- Since most of the content of this article is unsourced, changing one way or the other doesn't affect its lack of reliability. If referencing isn't provided, much of the content needs to be deleted. Peter coxhead (talk) 11:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Lophophora are always spineless?
[edit]I've never heard or seen of a spiny one until now. I bought one in a London shop a few days ago because it was definitely a peyote of some sort (not sure if Williamsii or Diffusa; colour of D. but flattened like W., but I'm not expert) and it has some sparse but definite thornage. Lightly curved, quite thin, about 3/4 inch long, not strongly attached. Zero to two to a tuft. I've never seen anything like it. I can probably sort out a pic if anyone's interested.
I presumed Lophophora had lost the genetics to grow thorns but perhaps not. Thoughts please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.29.238.127 (talk) 19:09, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Edit: and 30 seconds after I posted this, I browsed the wikimedia commons and found this <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Cactus_with_one_white_flower.jpg>, a thorned peyote. Not quite like mine but definitely got teeth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.29.238.127 (talk) 19:13, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
