CHATPRIVACYDONATELOGINREGISTER
DMT-Nexus
FAQWIKIHEALTH & SAFETYARTATTITUDEACTIVE TOPICS
San Pedro drug test Options
 
Acu
#1 Posted : 10/11/2019 9:28:05 AM
DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 23
Joined: 28-Nov-2015
Last visit: 10-Sep-2020
Hi all, does anyone know if consuming San Pedro extract would cause me to fail a urine drug test?

We have around 3 random drug tests per annum at my work.

From memory the test is for thc, amphetamines, benzos, opiates, as well as testing for masking agents and heat. It may test for couple other things i can't think of.

If we fail a piss test they send it away for more testing, or they may send away a blood sample, I'm not too sure.

Anyway any help is appreciated, a failed test is pretty costly, and wouldn't look great with the position I'm in.

Cheers.
 

Psychedelic news, articles, interviews and art from the DMT-Nexus and other sources.
 
Tony6Strings
#2 Posted : 10/11/2019 9:39:34 AM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 909
Joined: 23-Jun-2018
Last visit: 30-Oct-2020
The only psychedelic I have ever seen tested for on a UA is MDMA. I've taken a great many of them in my life between the Youth Authority, probation, inpatient treatment, living in an Oxford house for two years... Five panel, ten panel, sent into the lab, never have I ever seen a test for mescaline. I say you're good to go.
olympus mon wrote:
You need to hit it with intention to get where you want to be!

"We have arrived at truth, and now we find truth is a mystery- a play of joy, creation, and energy. This is source. This is the mystic touchstone that heals and renews. This is the beginning again. This is entheogenic." -Nicholas Sand
 
benzyme
#3 Posted : 10/11/2019 2:10:38 PM

bioanalytical chemist

Moderator | Skills: Analytical equipment, Chemical master expertExtreme Chemical expert | Skills: Analytical equipment, Chemical master expertChemical expert | Skills: Analytical equipment, Chemical master expertSenior Member | Skills: Analytical equipment, Chemical master expert

Posts: 7221
Joined: 21-May-2008
Last visit: 29-Oct-2020
Location: the lab
no. It's not typically screened for.
My company has a tox panel of 120 analytes. Mescaline isn't one of them.
"Nothing is true, everything is permitted." ~ hassan i sabbah
"Experiments are the only means of attaining knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." -Max Planck
XMR 46JqfBqi7JNM1W5rXXZ1FF1CBKKLoGEVBRya9Cn3RJmPbQhT4GeZpVKWbwaVe4vUMveKAzAiA4j8xgUi29TpKXpm3whx5MW
BTC 3CNrz6Tj17U35GLkRB1zsNtVoedorw8oja
ETH 0xd433198cb786145767c67d874b36cd7d42baf57a
 
TalkingGarden
#4 Posted : 10/11/2019 3:12:42 PM
DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 132
Joined: 21-Sep-2019
Last visit: 16-Dec-2019
agreed they USUALLY don't check for it. But could If they suspect something specific.
 
coAsTal
#5 Posted : 10/11/2019 3:21:44 PM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 306
Joined: 18-Jan-2008
Last visit: 28-Oct-2020
What about hair follicle? I've seen conflicting reports on this...
 
benzyme
#6 Posted : 10/11/2019 3:35:43 PM

bioanalytical chemist

Moderator | Skills: Analytical equipment, Chemical master expertExtreme Chemical expert | Skills: Analytical equipment, Chemical master expertChemical expert | Skills: Analytical equipment, Chemical master expertSenior Member | Skills: Analytical equipment, Chemical master expert

Posts: 7221
Joined: 21-May-2008
Last visit: 29-Oct-2020
Location: the lab
Is it possible? yes. probable? highly unlikely.

An assay must be validated, to specifically screen for [metabolites of] mescaline. It's just not a commonly used/abused compound. There's no money in screening for it.
"Nothing is true, everything is permitted." ~ hassan i sabbah
"Experiments are the only means of attaining knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." -Max Planck
XMR 46JqfBqi7JNM1W5rXXZ1FF1CBKKLoGEVBRya9Cn3RJmPbQhT4GeZpVKWbwaVe4vUMveKAzAiA4j8xgUi29TpKXpm3whx5MW
BTC 3CNrz6Tj17U35GLkRB1zsNtVoedorw8oja
ETH 0xd433198cb786145767c67d874b36cd7d42baf57a
 
coAsTal
#7 Posted : 10/11/2019 5:09:16 PM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 306
Joined: 18-Jan-2008
Last visit: 28-Oct-2020
I've seen people claim that it could produce false-positive for MDMA, being in the family of Phenethylamines -- I always wondered if that could happen
 
benzyme
#8 Posted : 10/11/2019 7:29:57 PM

bioanalytical chemist

Moderator | Skills: Analytical equipment, Chemical master expertExtreme Chemical expert | Skills: Analytical equipment, Chemical master expertChemical expert | Skills: Analytical equipment, Chemical master expertSenior Member | Skills: Analytical equipment, Chemical master expert

Posts: 7221
Joined: 21-May-2008
Last visit: 29-Oct-2020
Location: the lab
maybe in a preliminary reagent test that's nonspecific. Can't fool GC-MS or LC-MS.
"Nothing is true, everything is permitted." ~ hassan i sabbah
"Experiments are the only means of attaining knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." -Max Planck
XMR 46JqfBqi7JNM1W5rXXZ1FF1CBKKLoGEVBRya9Cn3RJmPbQhT4GeZpVKWbwaVe4vUMveKAzAiA4j8xgUi29TpKXpm3whx5MW
BTC 3CNrz6Tj17U35GLkRB1zsNtVoedorw8oja
ETH 0xd433198cb786145767c67d874b36cd7d42baf57a
 
Mindlusion
#9 Posted : 10/11/2019 8:50:54 PM

Chairman of the Celestial Divison

Extreme Chemical expertChemical expertSenior Member

Posts: 1327
Joined: 21-Jul-2010
Last visit: 27-Oct-2020
Location: the ancient cluster
most commonly urinalysis drug test is done by a immunoassay based screening. (strips) And if those read positive, then the sample is sent away for GC-MS/LC-MS to rule out false-positives. Most companies will not go out of their way to run GC-MS/LC-MS on the samples because it is expensive. I would bet most companies would rely on just immunoassay alone if they were allowed to.

The immunoassay works by testing against antibodies.

So with the drug testing strip, you are not detecting the drug metabolites themselves, but you are detecting the immune response with the drug metabolite 'antigens'.
This is more accurate than a reagent based test, but will still trigger a positive for anything with a similar structure/activity relationship. If it is metabolized in the same way, it will trigger the same antibody.

So any amphetamine would test positive for amphetamine, including psychedelic amphetamines. Immunoassays can be pretty structure specific as well, differentiating between amphetamines like MDxx and N-methyl amphetamines. Even so far as differentiating enantiomers.

The selectivity is a matter of sensitivity, not exclusivity. So if you have an antibody that is selective for d-amphetamine, it can detect d-amphetamine at 0.1ng/mL, and can detect false positives like ephedrine at 20ng/mL, and then false positives of phenethylamines at 100ng/mL, etc.

so in this example the natural phenethylamines in your blood won't register as a false positive as long as they are below 100ng/mL.

So I would lean towards no, phenethylamines like mescaline should not cause a false positive on an immunoassay. As long as you aren't dosed up on a gram of mescaline while you taking the pee test. However, since dosage for mescaline IS much higher relatively speaking, the chances of getting a false positive is higher for a phenethylamine like mescaline, vs a phenethylamine like 2c-b.

It is also possible psychedelic phenethylamines are more sensitive to a false positive to the MDMA antibody, since they are both oxygenated phenethylamines, vs the unsubstituted amphetamine.

In my experience however, I've taken one of these immunoassay tests after taking TMA-2, an oxygenated psychedelic amphetamine, and it tested a false positive for amphetamine and not MDMA. Results vary on the specific amphetamine antibody being used, and there is not always an obvious trend of sensitivities towards the substituted analogs, these have been well studied in the literature.
Expect nothing, Receive everything.
"Experiment and extrapolation is the only means the organic chemists (humans) currrently have - in contrast to "God" (and possibly R. B. Woodward). "
He alone sees truly who sees the Absolute the same in every creature...seeing the same Absolute everywhere, he does not harm himself or others. - The Bhagavad Gita
"The most beautiful thing we can experience, is the mysterious. The source of all true art and science."
 
coAsTal
#10 Posted : 10/11/2019 9:19:15 PM

DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 306
Joined: 18-Jan-2008
Last visit: 28-Oct-2020
Great info, kind Nexians-- thank you for the knowledge
 
Mindlusion
#11 Posted : 10/11/2019 9:30:59 PM

Chairman of the Celestial Divison

Extreme Chemical expertChemical expertSenior Member

Posts: 1327
Joined: 21-Jul-2010
Last visit: 27-Oct-2020
Location: the ancient cluster
here is a good page on how the process for developing these antibodies actually works:

https://www.thermofisher...unogen-preparation.html


Because drug molecules aren't large enough to elicit an immune response, in order to develop an antibody, you first must attach the drug molecule to some antigen, to make a conjugate.
Then you give it to an animal and then collect the corresponding antibodies produced. Depending on how the conjugate is produced, that antibody will test positive for the molecule and its related structures which was attached to the antigen. You can get very different sensitivities depending on how you made the conjugate.

For example, in some cases they attach amphetamine to the antigen via the amino group, or another way to do it is attach it via the phenyl group. And these give you antibodies with very different selectivity. One may test positive for any amphetamine analogue around the amino group ( so amphetamine and Mamp) but not test positive for phenyl substituted amphetamines (like psychedelic ones). Vs the other may test positive for amphetamine and all phenyl substituted phenethylamines, and not test positive for N- substituted amphetamines.
Expect nothing, Receive everything.
"Experiment and extrapolation is the only means the organic chemists (humans) currrently have - in contrast to "God" (and possibly R. B. Woodward). "
He alone sees truly who sees the Absolute the same in every creature...seeing the same Absolute everywhere, he does not harm himself or others. - The Bhagavad Gita
"The most beautiful thing we can experience, is the mysterious. The source of all true art and science."
 
Acu
#12 Posted : 10/12/2019 6:50:58 AM
DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 23
Joined: 28-Nov-2015
Last visit: 10-Sep-2020
Thanks everyone for the detailed replies Smile

 
Acu
#13 Posted : 10/12/2019 6:53:50 AM
DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 23
Joined: 28-Nov-2015
Last visit: 10-Sep-2020
benzyme wrote:
maybe in a preliminary reagent test that's nonspecific. Can't fool GC-MS or LC-MS.


So because our samples get sent away for further testing if they come back positive, we can assume they're being sent for GC-MS or LC-MS?

And if it does get sent for GC-MS or LC-MS they will spot the mescaline?

Although you believe it's unlikely that the original urine test should return a false positive in the first place?

Thanks.
 
Acu
#14 Posted : 10/12/2019 6:59:45 AM
DMT-Nexus member


Posts: 23
Joined: 28-Nov-2015
Last visit: 10-Sep-2020
Mindlusion wrote:
most commonly urinalysis drug test is done by a immunoassay based screening. (strips) And if those read positive, then the sample is sent away for GC-MS/LC-MS to rule out false-positives. Most companies will not go out of their way to run GC-MS/LC-MS on the samples because it is expensive. I would bet most companies would rely on just immunoassay alone if they were allowed to.

The immunoassay works by testing against antibodies.

So with the drug testing strip, you are not detecting the drug metabolites themselves, but you are detecting the immune response with the drug metabolite 'antigens'.
This is more accurate than a reagent based test, but will still trigger a positive for anything with a similar structure/activity relationship. If it is metabolized in the same way, it will trigger the same antibody.

So any amphetamine would test positive for amphetamine, including psychedelic amphetamines. Immunoassays can be pretty structure specific as well, differentiating between amphetamines like MDxx and N-methyl amphetamines. Even so far as differentiating enantiomers.

The selectivity is a matter of sensitivity, not exclusivity. So if you have an antibody that is selective for d-amphetamine, it can detect d-amphetamine at 0.1ng/mL, and can detect false positives like ephedrine at 20ng/mL, and then false positives of phenethylamines at 100ng/mL, etc.

so in this example the natural phenethylamines in your blood won't register as a false positive as long as they are below 100ng/mL.

So I would lean towards no, phenethylamines like mescaline should not cause a false positive on an immunoassay. As long as you aren't dosed up on a gram of mescaline while you taking the pee test. However, since dosage for mescaline IS much higher relatively speaking, the chances of getting a false positive is higher for a phenethylamine like mescaline, vs a phenethylamine like 2c-b.

It is also possible psychedelic phenethylamines are more sensitive to a false positive to the MDMA antibody, since they are both oxygenated phenethylamines, vs the unsubstituted amphetamine.

In my experience however, I've taken one of these immunoassay tests after taking TMA-2, an oxygenated psychedelic amphetamine, and it tested a false positive for amphetamine and not MDMA. Results vary on the specific amphetamine antibody being used, and there is not always an obvious trend of sensitivities towards the substituted analogs, these have been well studied in the literature.


The urine test we do has the strip on the side of the plastic jar and from memory they just sit the jar on it's side for a while and it comes back with a result pretty quick.

So 100ng/mL must be a lot of mescaline then? I definitely don't intend to be under the influence to the point of impairment at work.

I'm more interested in occasional low to moderate doses, in conjunction with 3 or so datura seeds to potentate a bit more, if i find that combo works for me.

Would mescaline continue to build up if I were to have say 2 moderate doses per week for a month or so? Is there a risk of it reaching that 100ng/ml level eventually?

Thanks.


 
 
Users browsing this forum
Guest

DMT-Nexus theme created by The Traveler
This page was generated in 0.033 seconds.