From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychoactive and Recreational Drugs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of psychoactive and recreational drugs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Plants (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Altered States of Consciousness (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Altered States of Consciousness, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Altered state of consciousness on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ayahuaca and Yage are not the same[edit]

I lived in South America for ten years. Yage is the male of the vine , Ayahuasca the female - yage is reputed to be stronger. This should be substantiate dand if turns out to be correct, changed — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 13:30, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

Purging section[edit]

I think its important to add that ayahusca causes the user to vomit profoundly some period after ingestion. Many reports show even veteran shamans still 'purge' and that this purging is part of the ceremony. This unavoidable throwing up, often projectile vomiting is a part of ayahusca so should be included. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:18, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

That said, it's also well documented that purge via vomit or bowel evacuation is by no means a "happens every time" ayahuasca accompaniment; some reports include sinus phlegm expulsion, fwiw often experienced as a positive effect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 11:40, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

'Preparation' section[edit]

In what way is the strength of ayahuasca different from the psychoactive effect? Also, in the last paragraph, studies of the 'Hoasca' project were done, and a review was published, but there is no mention of any factual information of use to this article. If these studies are not pertinent to the article, the references should be removed. MrPMonday (talk) 07:51, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Psychoactivity could be more of a medical description of the effects that would related to the alkaloid content, while "strength" (and the other typical qualifier of "light") would be more experiential. Perhaps this is what the original author meant (?). Also, the reference questioned above does have factual information of use to this article, and the list of published scientific articles are pertinent. For these reasons, I would hope that none of these references are removed.Jace1 (talk) 15:05, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Just wanted to correct the last sentence of the Preparation section: "Some shamans flash blanch the Psychotria viridis leaves by exposing the leaves to heat emanating from the cooking fire to modify the various harmaline alkaloids into more psychoactive forms." Psychotria viridis leaves don't contain harmaline alkaloid's in any significant amount, those are in the Banisteriopsis caapi vine. So it could be changed to " modify the various tryptamine alkaloids." Please let me know what the consensus is. Vajko (talk) 18:53, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

This is certainly an important point. Unfortunately, there have been many edits to this page that defy logic. In fact, P. viridis has no harmala alkaloids, and effectively no alkaloids other than DMT. As for the other part; " modify tryptamine alkaloids.", this does not help at all. First, DMT is effectively the only alkaloid in this leaf, so the plural is not required. Secondly, how would DMT be "modified" by heating the leaves in this way? Any such modification would be an oxidative process, depending on time and temperature, thus any such modification would be to an inactive oxide(s). Perhaps the leaves are being dried for better extraction (?). This needs more thought and clarification. (talk) 07:04, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Reference in 1932 Magazine[edit]

An early reference in the US to 'yage':

ModernMechanixBlog - Drug Said to Cause Clairvoyance [1]
- Modern Mechanics and Inventions, April 1932 —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:50, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Legal status in France[edit]

I removed the following from the end of the article as it seemed to be more of a debate on sources than useful content for the article:

(following French websites do not appear to mention this, please provide precise citations and quotes, in French if necessary.) See Détail d'un texte (states that on 20 avril 2005 several substances were added to list of stupefiants) and communiqué de presse (in French) (summarises 2 years of work by Partenariat Afssaps/Associations de patients et de consommateurs, but no direct mention of tea; require direct links and precise quotes (in French) to verify this paragraph's claims) for more information.

If these websites provide verification for the existing text in the article, please add them as as normal reference citations. If they do not, leave them off. The matter should be settled here on the Talk page, however, rather than within the article. Kaldari (talk) 23:55, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

MAO Inhibitors and antidepressant use[edit]

I didn't see any warnings to persons who must be on an antidepressant or stimulant therapy, about the combination of MAO inhibitors and serotonergic drugs. Serotonin Syndrone, or Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome is likely with the combination. For those who are on serotonergic/norepinephrinergic therapy of any kind, I recommend avoiding Ayahuasca. DMT can always be smoked by itself, though the effects are shorter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 23:10, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Good point! Some time ago, this article did contain such information, with scientific references. Unfortunately, someone decided to take that away, and some other unproductive changes followed. It would be helpful if potential editors of this article would first try to work things out in the discussion page. I wonder if these people are even reading this page (?).Jace1 (talk) 14:25, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
If the material was well-sourced, just go back in the history, find the sourced content, and put it back in the article. I agree that sort of information should be included. - Kathryn NicDhàna 20:28, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
As a way of trying to avoid liability, some purveyors of Ayahuasca Tourism requre the tourists to abstain from all medications prior to arrival. This is also a serious health risk if the tourist has a health condition that requires their current medication to stay alive and functional. There's a lot of anecdotal information on this, and some of it could be sourced from liability waivers on the tourism websites. If there are WP:V and WP:RS sources we could use, they should definitely be added. - Kathryn NicDhàna 20:35, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

- I posted about the 'health' effects of Yage (Ayahusca), to address some of these issues. Hopefully in the future it can be expanded to provide both information about the negative effects and positive effects. (I will be researching further, however perhaps it might not be appropriate for me to do so, as I'm just a laity amature researcher with no official credentials of psylogly. I have however posted about the only death of Aya by an American psychonaught. There are many mitigating factors such as improperly mixed Yage, (mixing some very toxic drugs, and alot of hearsay about the "REAL" way of mixing Aya as understandably most of these shamans are self taught, or competiting. However I'm sure there are some scientific research as universities and governments have been testing that we could uncover.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsamcat (talkcontribs) 10:07, 27 February 2013‎ (UTC)


would be interesting if the article had description of the effects as well as health risks and such --TiagoTiago (talk) 20:27, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

I've actually heard that the brew is shown to have various nutritional benefits and no neuro-toxic attributes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Avenkat0 (talkcontribs) 16:46, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

I posted about the 'health' effects of Yage (Ayahusca), to address some of these issues. Hopefully in the future it can be expanded to provide both information about the negative effects and positive effects. (I will be researching further, however perhaps it might not be appropriate for me to do so, as I'm just a laity amature researcher with no official credentials of psylogly. I have however posted about the only death of Aya by an American psychonaught. There are many mitigating factors such as improperly mixed Yage, (mixing some very toxic drugs, and alot of hearsay about the "REAL" way of mixing Aya as understandably most of these shamans are self taught, or competiting. However I'm sure there are some scientific research as universities and governments have been testing that we could uncover. [edit]effects — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samsamcat (talkcontribs) 10:07, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

This news article is sensationalist. They are making an affirmation without evidence that ayahuasca was the death case. It is only know that Vargas confessed he buried the body (which is not relevant for this article). You will need better references for that, as described in Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine). --KDesk (talk) 17:38, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure if this is the case or not, but shouldn't the effects section have effects that sound more scientific? I know some new age and pre-columbian religions use the drink for religious purposes but shouldn't the effects describe the biological/chemical effects of the drink before diving into the perceived spiritual effects? You don't see the page for unleavened bread listing the religious significance of it before going into the non-religious description. This effects section is hardly helpful when determining the actual physical effects. -- (talk) 02:45, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Ethereal considerations[edit]

While all of the things considered as factual, are quite interesting they seem to fly by some very interesting points, for instance how did indigenous natives ever form such a complex chemistry and gain this result? It seems the western approach is to study the inside of the spaceship and not ever discern that is can cross the galaxy in microseconds. The originators of this mixture may not have ever needed it, because they were already attuned to the ethereal world to a great degree, but saw the need for a blasting agent to open up clogged and to them, sick heads. The plants likely told them of their properties in some type of dream state vision. We do not trust research of this nature but this is possibly a mere a weakness based in fear of the unknown. Science will try to unravel this issue for ever but none of these chemicals really do much, because they are result not process. To those of us who see the power of the ethereal part of this world, there is realization that what comes from above effects below. The power of the plants are what makes them real, the ethereal spark of life within them causes the journey to knowledge that makes survival in the jungle possible. Thus the seers are healed. Comments welcomed Mage AmenRA (talk) 01:13, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

What you are suggesting is pure, fanciful speculation, not even a viable theory.
Quote: "The plants likely told them of their properties in some type of dream state vision." Do you honestly think that is a statement worthy of inclusion in a factual encyclopedia? Frankwm1 (talk) 20:33, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Recurring Edits[edit]

There are a number of edits that continue to be made by related IPs and (recently) Awka1. These edits, while probably made in good faith, are inappropriate for a number of reasons (POV, link spam/link removal). I do not want to engage in an edit war. Please discuss any further changes here. A dullard (talk) 03:38, 15 July 2010 (UTC)


The current IPA [ajaˈwaska] doesn't look right - all those /a/s really the same? Is that even possible? Ok I'm not a Quechua speaker, but the two most common pronunciations I've heard are [aɪjəˈwæskə] and [aɪjəˈwaːskə] (ie they differ on whether a short or long a is used in the third syllable). Less commonly, /eɪ/ ('a' as in 'rake') may be used instead of /aɪ/ ('i' as in 'rice') for the initial sound. Comments? Quaestor23 (talk) 16:44, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I have now converted the article intro to use the the two IPA forms above, in English as the word is essentially adopted now. Its Quechua origins are already discussed further down the article. Quaestor23 (talk) 12:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
IPA rarely if ever looks right. It's obfuscatory. Pls use, or at least include, a common pronunciation guide like EYE uh HUS ka (talk) 02:04, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Citations needed[edit]

I added the "Citations needed" tag. I thought it was rather obvious where citations were needed -- the parts of the article that don't have any! But I received a message from user Viriditas. At Viriditas' request, here is a list of the major article points requiring additional citations, as they are presently blank assertions with no sourcing:

  • "Preparation" section: Paragraph 1, which is the main section of the article describing how ayahuasca is prepared, has no citations whatsoever. Paragraph 2 has 2 citations for the entire paragraph on the last sentence; most of the paragraph is uncited.
  • "Names" section: the entire section is completely uncited.
  • "Chemistry" - 1 paragraph long (needs to be much longer anyway), and 1 citation for the entire paragraph. Surely something so important as the chemical composition requires more than a single source on only 1 sentence?
  • "Usage" : Paragraph 1 - 1 citation, which seems to be entirely about the Urarina usage. No citations for any other usage. Paragraphs 5, 6, and 7 - no citations at all.
  • "Usage / Introduction to Europe and North America" - The long first paragraph has no citations at all. The long second paragraph has only 2, which do not adequately cover all of the assertions made. Paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 (which is very long) have no citations at all.
  • "Ayahuasca tourism" - no citations at all in this section.
  • "Initiation" - no citations at all in this section.
  • "Plant constituents / Traditional" - Very long and important section with no citations at all in the entire section.
  • "Legal Status" - no citations at all in paragraphs 6 ("In France...") and 7 ("In Peru...")

Kwertii (talk) 11:17, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for this useful work. I'm starting to add citations in this article which is indeed in dire condition as to citations. Added already a couple in "Legal Status" about the French case. I looked for a template that could fit but to no avail: There's apparently no Law citation template adapted to these citations (a French court judgment, and an entry in official journal (the equivalent of Federal Register). I did my best... --Doctorcito (talk) 16:33, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

First academic description of the brew by Dick Schultes???[edit]

The assertion "first described academically in the early 1950s by Harvard ethnobotanist Richard Evans Schultes" is surprising, to say the least.
Even if one rules out British botanist Richard Spruce's because his descriptions of ayahuasca-caapi and its uses, originally partially published in the Hooker's Journal of Botany and Kew Garden Miscellany in 1853 and 1855, and compiled and republished by A.R. Wallace in 1908, were letters or commented lists, there is still are the first academic ones if a "first" is absolutely to be find. And Spruce is just the first among a number of scholars who "academically described the brew" long before Dick Schultes.

(Edit: I forgot that what Wallace included about caapi-ayahuasca in the 1908 book had been compiled and rewritten by Spruce himself and published in 1873 in Ocean Highways: The Geographical Review under the title "On some remarkable narcotics of the Amazon Valley and Orinoco". I just re-read this article, which was included in Luis Luna and Stephen White's anthology Ayahuasca Reader: it does in fact qualify as an academic description of the brew. Of course of the 19th century, but, hey, the Royal Botanic Gardens at Kew of 1850 was no less an academic institution than the Harvard Botanical Museum of 1950. No wonder Dick Schultes hold Dick Spruce as his personal hero! --Doctorcito (talk) 13:02, 18 November 2010 (UTC))

To cite a few others, Colombian chemist Rafael Zerda Bayón (1906 & 1915), German anthropologist Theodor Koch-Grünberg (1909 & 1910), Finnish Americanist Rafael Karsten (1920 & 1923), French MD Pierre Reinburg (1921), and Colombian MD Guillermo Fischer Cárdenas (1923), all described versions of the brew, and most drank it (when not preparing their own). Most of those descriptions aren't in English, but that's perhaps not sufficient to make as if they don't exist...
A minimum of scholarship shows that knowledge of ayahuasca brew, and particularly of B. caapi infusions and extracts, was already remarkably accurate among some Western scientists in the mid-1920s. --Doctorcito (talk) 00:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)


There is a sentence in the Chemistry section that says that frequent use may result in tolerance. I read the reference cited to support this claim, and there is no mention whatsoever of tolerance in that article. I can find some bloggers on the web saying that ayahuasca produces tolerance, and some blogger say it doesn't. I have sources saying that N,N-DMT does not produce tolerance, but I can't find a scholarly article or book stating whether ayahuasca produces tolerance (although I'll keep looking).

If someone has a reliable source that discusses tolerance, please add it to the article. If no one objects via this discussion page, I plan on removing the tolerance remark. Jlampkins (talk) 05:39, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind. I found the needed citation. Jlampkins (talk) 06:05, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

External links[edit]

Moving this to talk until the article improves. Viriditas (talk) 01:40, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


Documentary films[edit]

Moving this to talk until the article improves. This is not a dumping ground. Viriditas (talk) 01:45, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Catholic church[edit]

The early missionary reports generally claim it as demonic, and great efforts were made by the Roman Catholic Church to stamp it out.

I searched for sources on this, but the only one I could find was Issues in Cultural Tourism Studies (2009) by Smith, who appears to have copied it from this article. So, removed until we have a source. Viriditas (talk) 08:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, I found two more, a special interest group (, which is probably not a good fit for this article, but does have good endnotes that may point to better sources on the subject; and a thesis by Soibelman 1995.[2] Soibelman points to Gerardo Reichel-Dolmatoff (1975), and I have a hunch this is the source we are looking for. Viriditas (talk) 11:21, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
It appears that the statement "The early missionary reports generally claim it as demonic" is an interpretation from p. 48 of The Shaman and the Jaguar (1975) (via Soibelman). However, I have still not been able to source the part about the Catholic Church. Viriditas (talk) 11:25, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Ayahuasca on the Stern Show[edit]

I had never heard of Ayahuasca until it was discussed at length and over the course of many days on the Howard Stern Show during the month of May 2011. Robin Quivers, the show's "news reporter", traveled to Peru (I believe) to participate in a mind-expanding experiment with a native shaman. She imbibed Ayahuasca at least twice during her trip.

On the show, she discussed her psychedelic "trips" and also the physical side effects. Stern and others on the show made frequent reference to the vomiting and diarrhea she experienced as a result of drinking the substance.

If there is ever an "Ayahuasca in Popular Culture" section added, this would be an appropriate entry. Agershon (talk) 16:29, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Removing paragraph on Stan Grof[edit]

I'm removing this unreferenced discussion of Stan Grof's theories. As far as I know, Grof has not written about ayahuasca. The idea that psychedelics involve memories of the actual birth process is unsubstantiated and frankly bizarre. Grof's speculative theories could be summarized on the Stanislav Grof page, but they do not belong on the pages of specific psychedelic substances.

The work of Stanislav Grof has been an important inspiration for a non-religious approach to working with entheogen.[citation needed] Grof’s primary focus has been on the transpersonal dimensions of the psychedelic experience.[citation needed] According to Grof, the birth process plays a decisive role in determining the individual's relationship to life in general, and to spirituality in particular. Problems experienced during the intrauterine (pre-natal) phase, a time when the foetus is physically one with the mother, are reflected in developmental problems. As a consequence, authority issues inevitably play a significant role in this type of ayahuasca use.[citation needed] The personality of the person or persons administering ayahuasca, the purposes for which it is being used, the level of understanding and commitment as well as personal views and beliefs involved play a much more important role in determining the outcome of ayahuasca use than in the more conventional ceremonies of the Santo Daime and União do Vegetal where interactions between participants are strictly regulated.

Zhunn (talk) 15:48, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I don't know why someone added that to this article, so you were correct to remove it. The idea first arose in 1975, when Grof published Realms of the Human Unconscious: Observations from LSD Research. Grof hypothesized that some of the images reported by people on LSD might originate from the perinatal period. These people reported "reliving" their own births. In the spirit of the 1970s and early 1980s, others worked with this idea to form several birth memories hypotheses. I don't think any of these have ever been accepted (I could be wrong), but more recent neuroscience research appears to suggest that one might be able to unlock these memories in some way. It's possible, therefore, that psychedelic drugs might act as the key to recovering early birth memories, but nobody really knows. Personally, I would like to recover memories from before I was born, but that's just me. :) Viriditas (talk) 12:30, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

Things that could/should be included in the article:[edit]

I was surprised to read the article and find some major things missing from it:

  • The use of ayahuasca in medicine and healing (both traditional and Western) could be expanded.
  • The use of ayahuasca in the treatment of addictions isn't mentioned at all. This has been mentioned in many news articles, shows, documentaries, books, etc and I've heard of at least 2 prominent Western doctors doing studies and treatment with ayahuasca in this area - Canadian Dr Gabor Mate and French Dr Jacques Mabit. It is also frequently self-administered by drug addicts hoping that it will aid in quitting (the only mention of this currently in the article is that "William Burroughs... sought out yagé in the early 1950s... in the hopes that it could relieve or cure opiate addiction.")
  • What exactly are the effects and how long do the effects last?
  • More on ayahuasca in literature/films/etc.

I will try to find some sources when I have time to add these things to the article, but I figured I'd post this here in case anyone else wants to help, has any input/comments, has any sources to share, or knows of any history of things like this being removed from the article or anything like that. Thanks :-) -MsBatfish (talk) 09:56, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

I'm interested in the treatment of addictions bit, so I'll try to help with sources in that regard. Viriditas (talk) 00:57, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Regarding literature/films, I originally removed this section and placed it on the talk page up above. See Talk:Ayahuasca#External_links. Viriditas (talk) 04:11, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
Cool, thanks Viriditas.
I did see the list of documentaries under "External Links" above, but I agree that the article doesn't necessarily need a comprehensive list of all movies that ayahuasca has been mentioned in. Especially in list format with no other details like it was. But I do think it could use a section like "Ayahuasca in Popular Culture" or something like that, which contains the most notable works on ayahuasca with information about them.
There was an interesting documentary on the Canadian CBC recently about the use of ayahuasca in treating addictions, which featured the 2 doctors I mentioned above, titled "The Jungle Prescription" which can be viewed at The filmmakers are also working on a feature-length documentary film (see [their site] which is currently in the editing stage, and a book (presently yet to be published to my knowledge). Here are a few of the sources I've come across which could be used to add relevant info to the article:

Potential sources for info on the use of ayahuasca in the treatment of addictions:[edit]

(in no particular order)

A few papers that I have not yet found online sources for include:

  • Mabit J. 1993. Amazon shamanism and drug addiction: initiation and counter-initiation. In: AGORA Review, Ethics, Medicine, and Society, Paris.
  • Mabit J., J. Campos, J. Arce. 1993. Considerations surrounding the ayahuasca concoction and therapeutic perspectives. Revista Peruana de Neuropsiquiatría, Lima, LV (2).
  • Mabit J., R. Giove, J. Vega. 1996. Takiwasi : The Use of Amazonian Shamanism to Rehabilitate Drug Addicts. In: Yearbook of cross-cultural medicine and psychotherapy, Journal of Ethnomedicine, Berlin.
  • Sueur C., A. Benezech, D. Deniau, B. Lebeau, C. Zizkind. 1999. Hallucinogenic substances and their theraputic usages – Literature Review, Review of Drug Abuse Literature.


I know this is a lot to go through! And there is a lot more out there. Also it would be nice to find some older sources, since apparently people have been using ayahuasca in the treatment of addictions (especially drug addictions) for over 50 years (and that's just in the West or by people from the West). Anyway, any help on this would be greatly appreciated :-) -MsBatfish (talk) 06:22, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

--- The Role of Shamans--- Under "The Role of Shamans" I revised the sentence by omitting the qualifier "For various reasons", as it weakens the sentence. It now reads: Some shamans and experienced users of ayahuasca advise against consuming ayahuasca when not in the presence of one or several well-trained shamans.[13]). An expansion of this section could actually address the role of shamans, traditional or Western trained, or specify some of the "various reasons" that some shamans / users urge this precaution. With or without my edit, this section says little.

(I am aware of concerns held by some American shamanic practitioners, who dislike it when Aya is used as a starting rather than culminating experience. At least some of the debate centers around use of the drug without spiritual and personal preparation ahead of time: have you slept, have you done you laundry, paid your bills, ...? Sorry, no citations.) GeeBee60 (talk) 14:01, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

New Content in Research section -- call to reduce cited sources[edit]

There is some new content under the research section. It amounts to two sentences, each of which has a ridiculous number of references supporting a very noncontroversial statement. One sentence states that research is being done and the second that there was a conference. Neither sentence reports on results or conclusions of said research; in the absence of anything controversial do we really need so many footnotes? Can't we just use one good RS for each sentence and move the rest of the references to the further reading section? Thanks, Dave (djkernen)|Talk to me|Please help! 13:33, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Death of California Teen Linked to Ayahuasca[edit]

[[3]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 04:37, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

This links goes no where. If someone has some evidence on this topic, please share. Otherwise, there are no known deaths to be linked with acute ayahuasca use. (talk) 07:13, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Is the paragraph "Effects" really neutral?[edit]

Just saying...if people were to believe all that is written into it...well, then everyone would -and should- struggle to get some Ayahuasca... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Y3k (talkcontribs) 03:59, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

This paragraph is not neutral, it's clearly written from a spiritualist point of view. The sources cited are mostly anecdotal rather than the work of scientific experts (credentials include adventurer, shaman, and filmmaker) with the exception of Metzner (the APA recently revoked its accreditation for the school where he is employed). This section needs at least some clinical research to back up claims about what the effects "nearly always" are. (talk) 23:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. Both the "Effects" and "Warnings" sections present entirely subjective, credulous, sales-pitch information largely based on watching a goofy DVD. A properly anthropological view of some specific culture's drug-use ritual practice could be a welcome addition.Jtcarpet (talk) 01:20, 5 April 2014 (UTC)

Legal status in Spain[edit]

According to link below, there has been a recent legal case (summer 2013) resolved in favor of Dr. Fernando Latorre, who has been organizing Ayahuasca ceremonies in Barcelona since the 90's. I think this should be added to the article under Legal Status or Other Legal Issues. I however cannot do this because the of lack of my Spanish skills.

You can find the more information from:

You can find the official court statement here:

edit: fixed a link

Methods of Consumption[edit]

I am not sure how appropriate it would be to add a paragraph about alternative methods of consumption; Ayahausca can be smoked in a form commonly known as Changa. Changa often contains the B Caapi vine, perhaps a reference should be made on the vine's page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharleyMicu (talkcontribs) 21:28, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Death Effects on Drugs Tourists[edit]

It seems very misleading to leave these claims out entirely. It's quite possible to refer both to the claims that these young people died from taking ayahuasca as well as the response from the ayahuasca community that this was due to a charlatan who mixed other herbs in with the brew. I find the overall tone of the current page to be very biased, as if advertising the practice rather than giving a balanced presentation of the different views. It is not intolerant of indigenous practices to include mention of possible dangers and counter-claims along with the claims. [added by unsigned user 29 Sept 2015] The shamen gave some to a student traveller who fell ill and died. They dumped his body by a remote country road. (talk) 16:11, 27 April 2014 (UTC) Kyle Nolan, 18, is believed to have died while taking ayahuasca in Peru. Psyden (talk) 21:39, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

These incidents are most likely due to people taking ayahuasca in combination with certain psychiatric drugs such as MAOIs, SSRIs, TCAs, etc. Or it could also be caused by an overdose of datura that is sometimes added to the brew. --AcidRock67 (talk) 21:30, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Legality in the U.S.[edit]

In the Legal Status section it says...

The legal status in the United States of DMT-containing plants is somewhat questionable. Ayahuasca plants and preparations are legal, as they contain no scheduled chemicals. However, brews made using DMT containing plants are illegal since DMT is a Schedule I drug.

So far as I know Ayahuasca plants and preparations do indeed contain DMT, a Schedule I drug. Ayahuasca is a brew made using DMT-containing plants. I don't think it's correct to say that Ayahuasca and "brews made using DMT-containing plants" are different things. And so Ayahuasca would be illegal in the U.S., aside from religious use as approved by the courts, which I think means use only by a specific set of officially recognized churches. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 14:21, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Traditional Brew[edit]

Wow, this could not be written more from a spiritualist POV. Head spirits? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:6000:8740:CC00:E0EB:4DE0:1F13:1C1A (talk) 05:38, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

I agree. I've added a POV tag to the article. Seattle (talk) 03:38, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Psychedelia Sidebar[edit]

Every time I put up the psychedelia sidebar it is taken down. Ayahuasca is a psychedelic and deserves the sidebar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mangokeylime (talkcontribs)

And I will take it down again. Read the edit summaries in the history. As I explained there, putting that up top centers drug culture perspectives, not Indigenous ones. It's undue weight and given the social issues around keeping the vine from being over-harvested, culturally and racially insensitive. - CorbieV 17:13, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
I don't think it's wrong to have it. It's not as though having it condemns the topic to relate only to that aspect. Pandeist (talk) 20:18, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
It is a psychedelic substance, I believe it deserves to be on this page. The psychedelic sidebar is not just about drug culture but all things psychedelic: culture, arts, drugs, everything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mangokeylime (talkcontribs) 21:21, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
It's a traditional medicine. Having a recreational drug culture category up top is undue weight. Consider the systemic bias issues here. Also, we already have a hallucinogens template in the footer. That is sufficient. - CorbieV 22:56, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
I guess, but we were not trying to be insensitive or anything, it was a sidebar on the topic of psychedelics, not a "recreational drug use and party all night" sidebar. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mangokeylime (talkcontribs) 14:35, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
And how about if the sidebar is put in the "non traditional usage" section? That retains it on the page, yet signals that the association is nontraditional. Pandeist (talk)|

Let's talk science please[edit]

"Author Don Jose Campos claims that people may experience profound positive life changes subsequent to consuming ayahuasca" Really? How about another author that demonstrates the toxic effects of this substance on the human body. this page reads like some kind of ad for this stuff, but without any negative side effects — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:52, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

I think you'll find that various scientific studies conclude that ayahuasca is fairly non toxic. Unless of course tropane alkaloids are added to the brew, but that is very uncommon. --AcidRock67 (talk) 21:09, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
I am also interested in the science of this drug. I know of one man who is headed to take part in this in order to cure his depression. His friend said that because they saw no criticism or caution on the Wikipedia page they felt it was okay for him. This may be a harmless drug or not. But we as editors need to remember that what we write does influence people. When we are talking about health we need to take it very serious. I've never heard of this before, but reading through it, the article as it is currently written does seem to play down side effects, and be an endorsement of its benefits. People have life-changing experiences with this drug (that can mean many things), people feel better (for how long? and what does "better" actually mean?). If this is such an amazing drug, why can't we get it at the local pharmacy, where we know it is regulated? I suggest caution and less opinion.Sgerbic (talk) 00:14, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
There is enough scientific data to show that ayahuasca is fairly safe and nontoxic, aside from the occasional bouts of vomiting and diarrhea. Nonetheless people should tread carefully into these altered states as they can be quite terrifying. Humphry Osmond the british psychiatrist who first coined the word psychedelic once stated "to fathom hell or soar angelic just take a pinch of psychedelic". It is taboo amongst the indigenous people who use ayahuasca to take it without the presence of a shaman who will not just give it to anyone outside of ceremony. I do not think it would be a good idea for this stuff to be available for everyone at the local pharmacy but at the same time I don't believe that psychedelics are illegal because a loving government is concerned about your safety and well-being. (talk) 17:29, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ayahuasca. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot*this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 22:08, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ayahuasca. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

As of February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required on behalf of editors regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification, as with any edit, using the archive tools per instructions below. This message updated dynamically through the template {{sourcecheck}} (last update: 1 May 2018).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:31, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Good Source[edit]

Here is a good source from The Yale Globalist, maybe useful to the article. Happy edits! Jtbobwaysf (talk) 18:47, 14 June 2018 (UTC)