I am intrigued by a substance called dimethyltryptamine (DMT). This is the most powerful psychedelic drug and the most basic in structure. In fact, other tryptamines such as LSD and Psilocybin are a DMT molecule with additions atoms arranged around the basic structure. Amazingly, DMT is an endogenous chemical, produced in the pineal gland. It is believed to be released during death because it's effects are remarkably similar to reports of near death experiences. There is also specultion that DMT is involved in the dreaming process.

It is well documented that LSD, among other psychedelics, can cause schizophrenia, and Dr. Rick Strassman who seems to be the leading authority on DMT having performed dose responce, tolerence studies and investigations into DMT's effects when combined with anti-pschotic drugs, believes that organic schizophrenia could be cause by an overactive pineal gland. He breifly mentions in his book "DMT: The Spirit Molecule" that he performed some fMRI scans in the mid 90s but did not get any interesting results, possibly due to technical limitations. Unfortunately, the results were never published in a peer review journal.

Could the recent advancements in radiological technology yield interesting results? Perhaps a combination of fMRI or PET scans with EEG or MEG could teach us more about this mysterious substance. More specifically, how would these scans compare to those of a schizophrenic?

As such a small amount to DMT is required to produce hallucinations, and possibly schizophrenia, am I right in believing that an overactive pineal gland would not look any different on an fMRI scan alone? Is it possible to show any correlation between the effects of DMT on the brain and schizophrenia, or are there too many variables involved?

I am considering investigating this for my radiography dissertation. As a student I obviously wont be allowed to actually perform the research as it would involve a class A substrance, but if anyone has thoughts on the subject, or can recommend any relevant peer reviewed articles, I'd be grateful.

what does pubmed turn up?

I love this topic and am actively seeking a full blown DMT journey. I believe the reason that DMT is so difficult to trace is because the brain is so greedy in its uptake. This means the only way to reliably check for the source of DMT is to be unethical and see it in situ, ie while the patient is still alive. It seems they can detect trace amounts of DMT in our bodies, but the source of this DMT is elusive. The hypothesis that it comes from the pineal gland is not widely accepted because its purely speculative, however its a perfectly reasonable guess because of the nature of the pineal and also the bodies possible usage of DMT. When you look at all the symbolism around for meditating and spirituality, you come across the symbol of the third eye. People who try and explain the experience of nirvana or deep meditation often say it feels like light is flowing out of the top of the head. The educated guess for DMT being produced in the pineal should be accepted until we have methods to prove/disprove it, which is probably contrary to scientific procedures.

I would advise against a DMT experience without some experience in other less mind blowing hallucinogens, although you've probably done your homework to even come across this.

Simwod-
For your research have you come across -

Volume of the pineal gland in schizophrenia; an MRI study

Authors: Rajarethinam R.1; Gupta S.; Andreasen N.C.
??

Its not well documented that taking hallucinogens can give you schizophrenia. There are, however, models based upon hallucinogenic drugs of psychosis.

This could give you some ideas...

CIPRIAN-OLLIVIER, J. & CETKOVICH-BAKMAS, M.G. (1997). Altered consciousness states and endogenous psychoses: a common molecular pathway? Schizophrenia Research, 28, 257-265.

anyone who's tried hallucinogens knows that those models are bogus.

Yes, with much more focus in the literature based upon NMDA antagonist (Ketamine, PCP) and dopamine agonist (amphetamine) models.

exactly. makes me wonder why drug-induced psychosis would be considered a plausible model for schizo psychosis, unless the real motivations are to get cool drugs under the guise of schizo research.

I think it started mostly because
'hey, here's something that does really weird things with people's heads, psychosis must be related.'

I know my dad had taken acid for the first time at 14, and his first manic episode was soon to follow. I know since I have been born that drug use (ranging from alcohol to cocaine) has been the direct cause of his rapid cycling.

I recall reading somewhere that as Schizophrenia progresses, brain tissue deteriorates; why couldn't deterioration of brain tissue through drug use induce schizophrenia?

Some studies show improvements in some cognitive abilities in drug using schizophrenic patients.

Brain tissue would deteriorate in schizophrenic people who don't take drugs; not all schizophrenics take drugs. Also because most drug use, at levels used for intoxication, does not seem to deteriorate brain tissue, with possibly the exception of methamphetamine.

I can see why you see the negative impact his episode has had on your life and can understand your opinion on this subject. I can honestly say I don't know if acid caused your dad to deteriorate into manic depressive behaviour (if thats what you mean), but I would question whether your dads memory of this isn't tainted by his experience of acid. Its powerful stuff for sure, and can really blow away any misconceptions about what you really know about reality and your place in it. Its perfectly possible, if not likely, your dad was a manic depressive before the acid. Its not too difficult to diagnose but only when the correct symptoms are given to the doctor, and bi-polar disorders are rarely identified by the patient.

This is definately not a post to refute your claim or devalue your experience, only a balancing arguement.

And often first presentation to mental health services coincides with drug induced episodes, not because they didn't have a problem before but because that's how they got 'caught'.

Have you seen a PET scan on a chronic crack cocaine user?

Is it brain tissue deteriorating, or is it brain chemistry altering? I thought it was down to the latter.

Once again I am completely going off of speculation, but why couldn't altering brain chemistry lead to deterioration of tissue?

A simple experiment I would like to try would be to restrict an individuals zinc intake, and give them high doeses of copper. I suspect that in doing so, you would effectively create a manic state, or I imagine for most individuals, the body would self regulate, but those whos bodies are incapable would see manic symptoms.

From my personal experience, the tissue deterioration seems to occur durring episodes, so regulating and monitoring the copper to zinc ratio could potentially stop deterioration if my hunch is correct.

I'd like to know peoples opinions:

If you alter your perception artificially do you damage your normal everyday cognitive abilities?

I don't believe a temporary change in chemistry will significantly alter the nature of a person, except in extremely susceptible people. Paradoxically: It may change your mind.

Is there not some merit in seeing into the sub-conscious and the archetype imagery, either for spiritual reasons or biology and psychology pursuits?

I'm almost certain we're stumbling around in the blind when it comes to psychology without multiple views of the entity behind our exterior. I feel to answer our psychology we have to answer the questions of religion. I also believe the answer will be based in recursion or some fractal of biology.

I definitely believe that if you alter your perception artificially you damage your normal everyday cognitive abilities--for better or worse. After taking shrooms and experiencing an altered form of reality, I can never go back to my perception of the world prior to consumption. It has permanently changed my perception of the world, and thus how I am cognizant of the world.

PET scans of this nature usually show either dopamine receptor densities or dopamine transporter densities, not in itself evidence of neurotoxicity. Which study are you referring to? We're more into methamphetamine research in Australia, cocaine is too rare and too upper class to be widely abused and researched.

I kind of had more in mind non chronic, sub-dependence levels of use, otherwise I'd tentatively add in a few more drugs.
Just found a study which says chronic use of cocaine or heroin decreases NGF (neutrophic growth factor) and BDNF (brain derived neurotrophic growth). I think this could be a secondary phenomena more related to lifestyles of drug dependent populations rather than a direct drug effect, but I wouldn't be surprised either way.

Damaged does not equal changed or different and I think most of your cognitive abilities are probably well intact. Some studies suggest that people who don't experiment with drugs are worse off than those who do. This mostly has to do with qualities that precede the drug use, but these people don't all of sudden deteriorate post-use, the stats are necessarily of post-drug consumption populations

Well it is easy for you to say. I am assuming you have no history of mental illness in your family. If I use drugs at the wrong time, my brain chemistry can be pushed past the tipping point. I suspect that when one takes drugs, the experiences while on the substance and the altered state (increased neurotransmitters) result in the brain reconfiguring, or rewiring, in a way that could potentially be harmful or liberating.

I.E. acid flashbacks. About 6 months ago my Dad had "kaleidoscope eyes" that lasted for nearly a month. I have never heard of anyone who has not taken acid experiencing such a thing decades after the fact.

Hallucinogens are a one way door. Once you've gone through that door, the artifacts and visual/audible distortions may return in unusual circumstances. This could be when your ill, have smoked pot and had a beer, when staring at a pattern etc. Does this mean you've damaged yourself? I think those distortions are more an artifact of the biology that you were previously unaware of, and now more aware of the small changes.

My friend used to always say he could see hexagons overlayed on his vision from mushrooms/LSD. This is fairly important in my view, given the structure of a lot of natural formations (honeycombs, snowflakes, rock formations at giants causeway, hexagon on saturn). Being able to see these patterns are within us as well is a shortcut to our link back to Gaia.

There is a great little book out there called The Psychology of Seeing. Reading this book has made me question how I once viewed the world. I used to think the patterns we saw were significant, but now I really have my doubts.

Once I read a book regarding vision patterns where the author claimed that for a long time the American Indians that populated the costal shores of the Americas at the time of the discovery of the continent didn't see the European vessels anchored right in front of them. Because the concept of a giant water ship such as those didn't exist in their consciousness yet. If this claim is true, this would be a powerful insight into the mind and the perception of reality. The immediate implications to this claim are, needless to say, quite provocative. Has anybody else read this book. And if so, could you provide me with its name or author's name, since I long lost track of it? Sorry for vearing off topic a little bit here.