Talk:Panaeolus cinctulus

Pronunciation

Sub - ball - tea - at - tus.

Range

Sweden isn't indicated as having the mushroom, but my buddy collected some this week. It's quite common, actually. Revan (talk) 21:50, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Safer Use/Concentration

It would be sensible to have the average concentration of psilocin/psilocybin (and possibly even baeocystin) per gram of dried/fresh fruitbodies listed here to avoid possible overdosage. 87.146.133.44 (talk) 20:37, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

There is a reason none of the psychadelic mushrooms have this, because its too unreliable.--212.251.171.229 (talk) 05:08, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Confusing paragraph

The last paragraph of the introduction, dealing with the legality of Panaeolus cinctulus in the U.S. and commenting on the quality of its hallucinogenic properties, is badly written, confusing and lacking references. I propose to delete the second half starting from "One thing to note..." and moving the legality part to a new section, with a link to the main article on the Legal status of psilocybin mushrooms. MFdeS (talk) 04:14, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

Laughable

"Panaeolus cinctulus has a long shelf life compared to other magic mushrooms, as it contains no psilocin, is non-poisonous, and the psycho-activity comes only from psilocybin and its analogues. In contrast to LSD and hallucinogenic phenethylamines, and like other psilocybin mushrooms, Panaeolus cinctulus produces a low, mild psychedelic trip that lasts for a short while." Who wrote this? Where is your reference? No where, cause youre obviously perpetuating ridiculous myths. Psilocybin is converted in the body into psilocin, meaning there is no difference. Educate yourself fool... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.251.171.229 (talk) 05:11, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Legality

No mushroom can be properly identified by anyone other than a mushroom expert who is familiar with the specific species under question. The intent to possess a mushroom with psilocybin or psilocin must be established. There are so many lookalike mushrooms that identification of an hallucinogenic mushroom is impossible for any police person unless they are the aforementioned mycological expert. Even if the mushrooms are identified as hallucinogenic the person possessing them must be shown to have enough mycological expertise to identify the mushroom. Once the questionable mushroom is identified then the intent of consumption for religious purposes, or for the psychedelic experience must be then established.

If the person's intent is religious as is shown to be established in many cultures of the Americas then the whole question of legality must be first reviewed as the Charter of Rights and Freedoms of Canada and the Constitution of the United States ensures the practice of your religion without restriction. The religious use of mushrooms has been established in the Americas as having been practised since the late ice age through anthropological and archaeological methods. Most people who would partake of the so called 'Magic Mushrooms" are doing so for primarily spiritual and religious reasons. They want to participate in the spiritual nature of the fungus and to come to higher spiritual understandings. Thus, every law regarding the use and possession of these fungi can be considered to be of a nature that is highly suspect in North America as many people's spiritual beliefs mirrors that of the Native Peoples of the Americas who in their spiritual quests and religious practices used and still do use fungi as a fundamental to their relationship with the spiritual aspects of existence. If then a person is charged and then incarnated for possessing, or using any kind of fungi for the above stated purposes is being subject to a greater criminal action that the possession of the fungi for subjective legalities. There is no scientific basis for making the fungi illegal and it is rather a knee jerk reaction to the hippies who used the mushrooms back in the mid 20th century and those of like philosophies use the same fungi until this day.

As a result of these arguments then no person in Canada, or the United States who are protected by their fundamental charters of nationhood that protect them from prosecution for the practice of their spiritual rites cannot be charged with any crime as no crime under their laws has been committed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.94.33.229 (talk) 15:05, 28 February 2021 (UTC)