Talk:Tabernanthe iboga/Archives/2020

timeline

the timeline was taken straight from erowid. i removed but am going to ask for permission to use it, as its actually a nice thing to have. --Heah (talk) 23:31, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

MeDP: Dreadfuly sorry about that, I assumed that one could freely distribute the timeline as long as the credit was given, if that is the case, part of the text in the beginnig was also taken from Erowid.Sorry once again, MeDP.

I'm sure erowid will let us use it, but on their copyright info page they do request that people ask when using stuff from their site. so i just asked, and in all likelyhood they'll let us put it back up. (they can be slow to respond to emails and stuff though . . . ) --Heah (talk) 17:39, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

MeDP:Good thing then, I'd be glad to see it back up there since there is some pretty good information on that website, if erath or fire read this, sorry again.

Cult?

The page refered to the Bwiti religion twice as a cult. Seeing as it is one of three officially recognized religions in Gabon, I think it hardly qualifies as a cult. Therefore I removed the phrase cult.

Ethnobotanists

From the article: "Mentioned by ethnobotanists as a possible candidate as the mythical Tree of Knowledge that resided in the Garden of Eden." Of course, put like this, this will only be true for ethnobotaninsts who take the old testament literally. So I suggest a rewording. I suppose what was meant is that Iboga may be the source of the tale of the tree of knowledge. I thought about changing it to that, but that would constitute original research. But as it stands it can't be right, so I'll just remove it. Maybe someone who knows more about it will come along and correct it. DirkvdM 10:55, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

How to add original source material?

I found the original source material that was in question [here]http://www.edmonds-institute.org/outofafrica.pdf.

Page two of the pdf gives permission to quote in entirety. Don't know if the section here meets that guideline, nor do I know how to apply the edit to meet wikipedia standards.

A little help?

Vulture19 (talk) 21:17, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Soon to be delegalized in Poland

This substance is on the list of 18(?) Substances soon to be delegalized (criminalized) in Poland:

Argyreia nervosa - Hawaiian Baby Woodrose, Banisteriopsis caapi - Ayhuasca, Calea zacatechichi - Dream Herb, Catha edulis - Khat, Echinopsis pachanoi - San Pedro (cactus), Piper methysticum - Kava Kava, Leonotis leonurus - Wild Dagga, Mimosa tenuiflora - Jurema, Mitragyna speciosa - Kratom, Nymphaea caerulea, Peganum harmala, Psychotria viridis, Rivea corymbosa, Salvia divinorum, Tabernanthe iboga - Iboga, Trichocereus peruvianus, Benzylpiperazine - BZP, JWH-018 - Spice

the bill (author of the bill: Grzegorz Sztolcman?) was accepted by Polish Sejm (for - 404, against - 5, and 2 abstent)[1] [2], Polish Senat [3] and the President of Poland [4].

Ttg53 (talk) 14:09, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Are you going to add the info to the article when it goes through? I think it can be added now, if desired, as long as the reference to the bill being passed in one house (?) is cited. Then, when/if it becomes official, the edit will be simple....

Vulture19 (talk) 16:20, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Hallucinogen vs. Psychedelic

I'd like to change the phrase "hallucinogen" to "psychedelic" in the first paragraph. Does anybody have a problem with this?

Note: tryptamines are not hallucinogens if one adheres to the medical definition of 'hallucination'; that is, perceptions of objects which do not physically exist but which the user cannot distinguish from objects that do exist. Psychedelic (that is, tryptamine & phenethylamine compounds) visuals are easily distinguishable from physical reality. Any references to ibogaine being a 'hallucinogen' are simply a misuse of the word; it's a psychedelic tryptamine, like all 5-HT agonists are.

Also, while some people consider 'psychedelics' to be a sub-category of 'hallucinogens', I would argue against this. Psychedelics are a category unto themselves.

(Psychonaut25 - 13375p34k / C0n7r1b5 11:31 PM EST, 20 September 2013 (UTC))

Update: Ok, I changed it. If anyone takes issue with this, here's your chance to voice your opinion.

(Psychonaut25 - 13375p34k / C0n7r1b5 11:51 PM EST, 20 September 2013 (UTC))

Tabernanthe (Genus)

As stated on the French Ibogaine wiki a variety of other plants in the Tabernanthe genus exists. Even the English Wikipedia on Ibogaine states, that Lambergene, a discontinued French medicine that had Ibogaine in it, was not produced, e.g. extracted from Tabernanthe Iboga, but from a different plant, namely Tabernanthe Manii. Yet if I search for the genus, I am being redirected to Tabernanthe Iboga. Is this intentional done in order to protect these plants, then please ignore what I wrote above, on the other hand, if Ibogaine can be produced commercially from another plant, it might save Tabernanthe Iboga from going extinct due to over harvesting from the wild. 78.94.40.101 (talk) 15:29, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

This is wrong

This is wrong: "In the United States Iboga is classified by the Controlled Substances Act on the list of schedule I drugs."

According to the U.S. DEA, the plant iboga is legal. https://local12.com/news/local/miami-university-faculty-members-could-lose-jobs-over-psychedelic-plant-in-conservatory 173.88.241.33 (talk) 03:50, 21 July 2019 (UTC)