[HN Gopher] Experts explore new mushroom which causes fairytale-...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Experts explore new mushroom which causes fairytale-like
       hallucinations
        
       Author : astronads
       Score  : 237 points
       Date   : 2025-12-26 17:07 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (nhmu.utah.edu)
 (TXT) w3m dump (nhmu.utah.edu)
        
       | astronads wrote:
       | It is interesting how the hallucinations consistently represent
       | tiny people/elves to the mushroom consumer, even across
       | geography/culture.
       | 
       | I wonder what the brain is doing...
        
         | nospice wrote:
         | Could be that the mushroom just temporarily interferes with the
         | substances the elves put in our water supply to keep us in the
         | dark?
        
           | egypturnash wrote:
           | s/elves/government
        
           | joe8756438 wrote:
           | exactly, the real question is what the elves are doing while
           | they're unseen.
        
             | ok_dad wrote:
             | They keep the universe running.
        
             | bell-cot wrote:
             | Making toys, caring for reindeer, sleight maintenance, ...
             | 
             | And spook work for His Jolliness' Secret Service, to keep
             | their Naughty and Nice databases current.
        
             | johnea wrote:
             | We should've asked Terence McKenna...
             | 
             | It could be a subspecies of the "machine elves"...
        
             | amarant wrote:
             | I can answer the what, that parts easy!
             | 
             | The real question is WHY they keep stealing my underwear
             | and left-foot socks?
        
           | eykanal wrote:
           | This is some real antimemetics stuff here :) (https://scp-
           | wiki.wikidot.com/antimemetics-division-hub if you're not
           | familiar)
        
             | Tempatio wrote:
             | Yeah the mushrooms are obviously an amnestic that lets you
             | see the elves which are usually antimimetically cloaked.
        
         | treetalker wrote:
         | Would be interesting if the chemical mechanism is related or
         | similar to the DMT one that creates the "machine elves"
         | experience.
        
           | astronads wrote:
           | Yeah, the machine elves rabbit hole is interesting for sure.
           | I hope a lot more rigorous science delves into both mushrooms
           | and DMT
        
             | andy_ppp wrote:
             | Someone has to support consciousness and reality I guess,
             | thanks to the elves I say...
        
         | flir wrote:
         | These mushrooms are small, these elves are far away.
        
           | seg_lol wrote:
           | You will get a kick out of
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVUuoXAkuUg a Corridor Crew
           | video on in-camera forced perspective effects.
        
         | bilsbie wrote:
         | Occam's razor would say they're real.
        
         | tokai wrote:
         | Lilliputian hallucinations are also common in mental illnesses
         | with hallucinations. Definitely some kind of physical
         | foundation for it in the human brain.
        
           | adzm wrote:
           | I imagine it is something similar to pareidolia.
        
         | newman8r wrote:
         | reminds me of trip reports from people trying Salvia Divinorum
         | - there's even a name for these tiny people, 'Smelves'
        
         | akka47 wrote:
         | Since we're in the topic of elves and common hallucinations, I
         | want to share these Salvia trip replicas that some say are
         | extremely accurate:
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z2IRKuS3sSE
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65XfIpJdlEY
        
           | ceroxylon wrote:
           | It gets the visuals accurate, but the experience includes a
           | lot of physical sensation that is very difficult to convey,
           | e.g. the 'wind' that pushes you back and the discomfort of
           | going into a chaotic dissociated state. You see those things
           | but it feels very 'real'.
        
         | pea wrote:
         | I think it makes sense given the following:
         | 
         | - Your brain has been trained extensively to recognize faces /
         | people. Even very small babies can do this.
         | 
         | - Your brain processes a large amount of mostly noise, and
         | sometimes mislabels noise as objects, which trends towards
         | face-like things (see: seeing faces in clouds, people in
         | shadows etc.) Various classes of substances make this effect
         | more noticeable (even stimulants, including caffeine)
         | 
         | - The jump from that to 'elves' is largely just cultures have
         | some form of small magical person.
        
       | candiddevmike wrote:
       | SWIM would like to know how to get paid as (instead of paying to
       | be) "an expert who explores new mushrooms".
        
         | neogodless wrote:
         | Someone Who Isn't Me?
        
           | MrDrone wrote:
           | Yes, this was a common phrase in early psychedelic and other
           | drug experience sharing forums. Like a verbal talisman people
           | believe kept them from incriminating themselves. I haven't
           | thought about it in years. Delightful.
        
           | awesome_dude wrote:
           | Yeah - I was going to ask... for a friend
        
           | mistersquid wrote:
           | > Someone Who Isn't Me?
           | 
           | Funny, I saw "SWIM" and reasoned "Someone Who Is Me",
           | thinking "is not" would be represented as "Is Not" instead of
           | the contraction. :)
        
           | Aurornis wrote:
           | In some online drug forums it was believed that if you used
           | SWIM instead of I for all of your posts, the government was
           | powerless to use any of the posts against you. You can still
           | find threads on forums where everyone is saying SWIM did this
           | and SWIM experienced that as if they have discovered a
           | loophole to protect themselves from the law.
           | 
           | It always reminded me of those FTP servers in the early days
           | of the internet that had big warning banners declaring the
           | law enforcement was not allowed to connect.
        
             | culi wrote:
             | I feel like most people didn't actually believe it would
             | somehow grant them legal protection but still used it kinda
             | tongue-in-cheek. I think it's kinda cute and still use "my
             | friend Swim..." in a joking way when talking about legally
             | dubious escapades
        
         | airstrike wrote:
         | I always feel like they should bring along an artist for the
         | trip so we can get a visual depiction of what it was like
        
           | optimalsolver wrote:
           | And a poet.
        
         | optimalsolver wrote:
         | Exploring new mushrooms is more likely to end in agonizing
         | death than piercing the veil of reality.
        
         | dekhn wrote:
         | Major in biology, do a grad program in medicinal chemistry,
         | join a lab that already studies this.
         | 
         | (I know folks who read PiHKAL and thought "Hmm, this would be a
         | nice ML training/prediction exercise")
        
         | rolph wrote:
         | some breadcrumbs for your SWIM
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terence_McKenna
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton_Morris
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton%27s_Pharmacopeia
        
       | isoprophlex wrote:
       | Incredible! A mushroom that bruises blue, but the visions are
       | seemingly unlike traditional tryptamines, and there's no
       | psilocybin found in the mushroom. Also no muscimol present (the
       | thing in Fly Agaric, the 'other' type of hallucinogenic mushroom
       | compound) yet there's definitely a consistent syndrome of
       | hallucinations if you eat it undercooked.
       | 
       | Could this mean we're on the brink of discovering an entirely new
       | class of hallucinogens?
        
         | culi wrote:
         | From the Wikipedia
         | 
         | > In 2023, Lanmaoa asiatica received international media
         | attention after U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen was
         | reported to have eaten a dish that contained it during an
         | official visit to China. Yellen stated that the dish had been
         | thoroughly cooked, and she experienced no ill effects
         | (hallucinations).
         | 
         | It seems _Rubroboletus sinicus_ , another bolete, is also
         | suspected to have this effect. These hallucinogenic mushrooms
         | are collectively known as "xiao ren ren" in China.
         | 
         | They seem to be relatively well known in parts of China, the
         | Philippines, and Papua New Guinea but the ethnomycological work
         | in English is just not really there.
         | 
         | It also seems like it's most likely something in the tryptamine
         | class which could explain the blue bruising. The Wikipedia page
         | has more info
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinogenic_bolete_mushroom
        
           | renewiltord wrote:
           | xiao ren ren? Like "small people"? Okay, if the mushrooms are
           | literally _called_ little guy mushroom and you see little
           | guys running around then surely this is an old discovery.
        
             | culi wrote:
             | Well yes ofc this is an old "discovery". Boletes are known
             | choice edibles around the world so ofc people would
             | discover that if they undercook this mushroom they would
             | trip. We even have some written history about it:
             | 
             | > The Chinese Daoist Ge Hong wrote in Baopuzi (The Master
             | Who Embraces Simplicity) around 300 CE that eating a
             | certain wild mushroom raw would result in attainment of
             | transcendence immediately, suggesting that the mushrooms
             | may have been known for thousands of years.
        
             | cess11 wrote:
             | It doesn't count until an occidental university has written
             | some stories about it and claimed to be the real discoverer
             | due to having put some stuff in one of their taxonomies.
        
               | stinkbeetle wrote:
               | That's not true at all.
               | 
               |  _Today 's_ occidental universities would have to pay
               | faux homage to "the poor helpless natives" who were the
               | original custodians of the discovery but were too
               | uncomplicated to do much with it, so with their wonderful
               | generosity these kindly westerners did them the great
               | service of elevating their voices, etc.
        
             | thaumasiotes wrote:
             | It doesn't look like Xiao Ren Ren  refers to the mushrooms.
             | It refers to the hallucinations, and is not expected to
             | include visions of people:
             | 
             | > "No!," she said, most emphatically, "They are _real_. I
             | have seen them myself! "
             | 
             | > Miss Oh clearly remembered the hallucinations that began
             | that evening and continued into the next day. The walls
             | moved and shifted in geometrical patterns and strange
             | shapes appeared.
             | 
             | > "I'm sleepy all day," she said in English. "I see them.
             | And I see flies bigger than the actual one, perhaps two
             | times big. I see little insects. Not all the time, but when
             | the water splashed out." She apparently became fascinated
             | by the dripping kitchen faucet, for each drop would, upon
             | hitting the sink, sprout wings and legs and crawl away. And
             | she remembered, very clearly, staring intently at the bows
             | of her shoelaces until they turned into butterflies and
             | fluttered off.
             | 
             | The paper devotes quite a bit of text to explaining that
             | the mushrooms bearing this quality have no specific name,
             | and in fact are not distinguished from non-hallucinogenic
             | mushrooms at all. They are referred to by their property of
             | turning blue when handled, which is a property not
             | exclusive to the hallucinogenic ones.
             | 
             | https://sci-hub.se/https://www.jstor.org/stable/40390492
        
         | poulpy123 wrote:
         | > mushroom sized > blue when bruised > make see small fairy
         | people
         | 
         | did they found the schtroumpf village ?
        
           | consp wrote:
           | Is any of the variants called gargamel or a latin variant of
           | it in the scientific name 'by accident'?
        
           | decimalenough wrote:
           | Aka the Smurfs in English.
        
         | bilsbie wrote:
         | Or a new reality...
        
         | ipsum2 wrote:
         | These mushrooms have been eaten for thousands of years. Does it
         | really count as a new discovery? Maybe isolating the specific
         | compound does.
        
           | ericmay wrote:
           | I don't think the article was insinuating that these
           | mushrooms were a new discovery, they've been known not just
           | in the region but to scientists for some time, though they
           | did assert that this is the first time that the DNA had been
           | sequenced.
        
           | isoprophlex wrote:
           | What excites me as a chemist (and as someone who dabbled in
           | psychedelics as a teenager) is the prospect of identification
           | the active components... and it turning out to be an entirely
           | new class of chemicals.
           | 
           | The great, late Alexander Shulgin made his fame through
           | systematic tweaking of the tryptamine and phenethylamine
           | backbones, giving rise to many interesting psychoactive,
           | mostly psychedelic compounds. Nature has a few more classes
           | of psychedelics, but it's very rare to come across an
           | entirely new category of molecular compounds.
           | 
           | Because the hallucinations are seemingly distinct from the
           | effects from traditional psychedelic, that's... pretty
           | tantalizing. But the mushroom does bruise blue, which is what
           | tryptamine-containing magic mushrooms also do.
           | 
           | It's super exciting, all in all. It's either a cultural or
           | mass psychological effect (but I doubt it personally), an as
           | of yet unidentified tryptamine-like compound that's highly
           | active (and thus difficult to isolate because theres
           | relatively little mass of it) or an entirely novel chemical
           | class.
        
             | culi wrote:
             | I think the point GP was making was to take issue with
             | framing like "and it turning out to be an entirely new
             | class of chemicals."
             | 
             | More accurately we can say "an entirely newly described
             | class of chemicals". Even before penicillin was isolated
             | and described for the first time, soldiers would keep moldy
             | pieces of bread and use them on wounds (Penicillium being
             | the most common bread mold). Even Otzi the iceman was found
             | to be carrying a piece of fungi that we know was used to
             | kill parasitic worms.
             | 
             | While these traditions didn't conceptualize their medicines
             | as compounds or chemicals, they were certainly well aware
             | of their effects. Sometimes intimately so.
             | 
             | All that aside though, there are bolete species documented
             | to have tryptamine content so I would be a little surprised
             | if the active compound(s) in question here aren't also
             | tryptamines. Although I did read that Dennis McKenna
             | hypothesized it could be an anticholinergic effect (i.e.
             | Datura alkaloids)
        
             | anthk wrote:
             | You would love the readings from Mckenna and the DMT, and
             | the concept of Fractal Time.
             | 
             | https://serendipity.li/trypt.html
             | 
             | List:
             | 
             | https://serendipity.li/dmt/dmtart00.html
             | 
             | Yeah, I know, pseudoscience and the like, but biology it's
             | _weird_ and with the current scientific discoveries (and
             | even reusing quantum mechanics for profit, such as
             | chlorofilla with leafs and photons), Nature itself it 's
             | 'magical'. Not actually something from fairy tales, but
             | from weird mechanics we are actually grasping a little
             | today.
             | 
             | Instead of my comment from I-Ching being taken as
             | numerology, I would think of the universe as something
             | being 'computed over', kinda like numeric towers under
             | Lisp. Because in the end nothing exists per se; it's just
             | fields generating matter, waves, energy and probably,
             | information. Thus, the Mckenna theory on Fractal Time (and
             | the Chinese paper from Vixra) might be related to
             | hypercubic equations (because of Hamming distance between
             | changes) that we aren't fully aware.
        
       | throw310822 wrote:
       | I was disappointed that the article doesn't contain pictures of
       | these little people.
        
         | throwup238 wrote:
         | It does but the liliputians are invisible on photographs unless
         | you've eaten the undercooked mushroom.
        
           | dekhn wrote:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Cottingley_Fairies_1.jpg
        
             | felubra wrote:
             | Strangely enough, I just finished listening today to this
             | podcast episode on the Cottingley Fairies (it's a great
             | listen):: https://omny.fm/shows/cautionary-tales-with-tim-
             | harford/phot...
        
           | pjerem wrote:
           | Easy, eat another well known species of uncooked mushrooms so
           | that your camera is now able to eat the mushroom.
        
       | chpatrick wrote:
       | Common Side Effects anyone?
        
       | spjt wrote:
       | Let's ban it before anyone finds out if it's useful
        
         | culi wrote:
         | Just need a minority in America to associate it with
        
       | amanaplanacanal wrote:
       | It appears there are several blue staining boletes in the same
       | genus that grow in the US. Seems like a fertile area for study.
        
       | tartoran wrote:
       | It's Elves all the way down.
        
       | markus_zhang wrote:
       | I wish it were another dimension, or breaking through the Matrix.
       | I never had the chance to experience such items but look forward
       | to doing so.
        
       | memming wrote:
       | Aparently Jian Shou Qing  is mildly toxic yet commonly consumed
       | in Yunan.
        
         | culi wrote:
         | Spinach too is mildly toxic because of its oxalate content yet
         | we eat it all the time. Some of those toxic saponins even have
         | certain health benefits. There are plenty other examples of
         | toxic foods we regularly consume: legumes contain deadly
         | saponins, beets contain oxalates, and potatoes contain
         | glycoalkaloids
         | 
         | From what I read _Suillellus luridus_ (Jian Shou Qing ) is
         | completely fine when cooked
        
       | jumperabg wrote:
       | If used can we hallucinate and predict the HN news of
       | tomorrow(especially any acquisition related news)?
        
         | metalman wrote:
         | yes,but you wont care.
        
       | czzprr wrote:
       | I have a friend who gave up taking regular magic mushrooms
       | because he always hallucinated tiny Power Rangers.
        
       | anigbrowl wrote:
       | _When mice are given chemical extracts of Lanmaoa asiatica, their
       | behavior shifts noticeably compared to controls._
       | 
       | Doesn't say how, for some reason. I presume they are shocked to
       | see tiny mice, but I would like to know what behaviors they
       | exhibited.
        
         | Ccecil wrote:
         | Are they seeing tiny mice...or are they seeing the same 2cm
         | tall "people"?
        
       | Aurornis wrote:
       | The Wikipedia page (
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinogenic_bolete_mushroom )
       | talks about effects lasting for days, even in animal studies.
       | Some of the historical records claimed effects lasting even
       | longer, from months to years, though this sounds like triggered
       | psychosis.
       | 
       | So perhaps not very recreational as might be assumed given the
       | topic.
        
         | why-o-why wrote:
         | "Days"?!? Hard pass. My experiments with shrooms in college was
         | fun, but I couldn't deal with the 8-12 hours of hallucinating.
        
         | consumer451 wrote:
         | Sorry to use a reddit-ism, but "this should be at the top" -
         | for safety.
        
       | RomanPushkin wrote:
       | The next step should be to send enthusiasts there, get samples of
       | this mushroom from that market, and introduce it to the
       | underground for personal research. That's normally what happens
       | when something interesting is discovered.
       | 
       | For example, members of a famous forum recently found, analyzed
       | for alkaloid content, and re-cultivated a strain of Phalaris
       | Aquatica because of its notable alkaloid content. Some other
       | mushrooms became popular this way as well -- for example,
       | Psilocybe Natalensis, first found in Natal, Africa. Or the now
       | famous Tamarind Tree British Virgin Islands (TTBVI) Panaeolus
       | Cyanescens that's widely cultivated at home.
       | 
       | So IMO it's not only scientists, but often enthusiasts who end up
       | gifting these discoveries to everyone else!
        
         | RickS wrote:
         | The natalensis story is even stranger: the underground was
         | growing what they _thought_ was natalensis for many years,
         | until someone finally did the sequencing and found out that
         | what everyone had grown and loved was actually new to science.
         | At this point last year, their  "natalensis" received its
         | proper scientific name, ochraceocentrata. The underground then
         | had to go out and fetch some actual natalensis, which is only
         | just now being introduced to those circles (eg by Yoshi Amano).
         | I haven't yet tried true natalensis, but ochras are definitely
         | distinguishable from the usual cubensis, experentially, and I'd
         | heartily recommend them to anyone that likes that kind of
         | thing.
        
       | contingencies wrote:
       | Lived in Yunnan for over a decade, primarily as a vegetarian.
       | Mushrooms there are indeed many and varied and quite tasty. Many
       | poisonings annually but the government are pretty good at helping
       | people to ID with warning posters. Personally ate many mushrooms
       | that looked like this and never had hallucinations. Did have some
       | others which made me feel a little ill, however. I suspect locals
       | are unduly relaxed about types science would avoid due to
       | hepatoxicity.
       | 
       | While occasionally FOAFs would get hallucinogenic effects from
       | dining, I don't recall explicitly hearing of anyone seeing little
       | people, or hearing the term he details in this writing. As such,
       | I wonder where this guy gets his info from. Certainly, most
       | Yunnanese would describe these mushrooms as Niu Gan Jun
       | ("bolete") and more specific Chinese common names for similar
       | reddish species would include Tao Hong Niu Gan Jun  ("peach-
       | colored bolete"). As a general type, they are _very common_ in
       | markets across much of Yunnan.
       | 
       | Given the claims, the clearly infrequent effects, and the
       | personal experience I can trust, I would conclude with three
       | theories: perhaps either the compounds are rapidly degraded when
       | non-fresh, safely broken down when cooking (traditionally these
       | mushrooms are cut thinly before sauteeing or boiling in hotpot),
       | or there are one or two "look alike" species which are more
       | rarely found and contain additional compounds which are
       | responsible for the occasional effects.
        
         | reissbaker wrote:
         | According to Wikipedia, the Yunnan mushrooms indeed have their
         | hallucinogens broken down after cooking:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hallucinogenic_bolete_mushroom
         | 
         | Good guess!
         | 
         | Although, the local hospital records imply that hallucinations
         | can last for days or even months, so uh, probably not a great
         | idea to go looking for them...
        
       | card_zero wrote:
       | So, about one mushroom species in five is poisonous. Why is the
       | ratio so low, why are there lots of edible ones? Without hard-
       | shelled seeds to spread, why be eaten? And the poisonous ones
       | apparently don't use color as a warning signal, and don't smell
       | all that bad, and some of the poisons have really mild effects,
       | like "gives only some people diarrhea" or "makes a hangover
       | worse". Meanwhile three of the deadliest species seemed to need
       | their toxin (amanitin) so much that they picked it up through
       | _horizontal gene transfer._ Why did just _those_ ones need to be
       | deadly? In addition to which we have these species that don 't
       | even make you sick, just make you trip out, a function which
       | looks to have evolved three times over in different ways. What
       | kind of half-assed evolutionary strategies are these? What do
       | mushrooms _want?_
        
         | tirant wrote:
         | That's also my thought. The seem to be inside some type of
         | evolutionary gray area or dead-end, where mutations in the
         | edibility axis do not seem to matter much for the survival of
         | the specifies. So we end up getting species of all extremes:
         | extremely poisonous, highly valuable for coursing, trippy, non-
         | trippy, mildly poisonous, etc.
        
           | yieldcrv wrote:
           | Metastatic cancer where our organs and cells grow every
           | direction forever until resources expire is extremely
           | counterproductive and doesn't matter for the survival of our
           | species because it usually occurs after reproductive age and
           | the reproduction happened. Perpetuating the flawed genes in
           | the next generation.
           | 
           | Its the same with mushrooms, the difference being that not
           | only do the spores exist in high numbers, a mushroom getting
           | eaten does nothing to the mycelium that spawns the mushroom
        
         | choilive wrote:
         | Its the same evolutionary patterns that plants went through.
         | 
         | Most mushrooms are edible because their spores can pass through
         | the digestive system of most animals, thus allowing them to
         | spread.
         | 
         | Other mushrooms developed toxins to protect their fruiting
         | bodies - often the biggest threat isn't larger animals, but
         | insects. Toxins that are neurotoxic to insect nervous systems,
         | happen to cause mostly "harmless" psychedelic trips to our
         | brains. Other toxin mechanisms happen to be deadly to both
         | insects and humans.
         | 
         | As proof of this evolutionary arms race, there are fruit flies
         | that have developed resistance to amatoxins.
        
         | observationist wrote:
         | They want the same thing as every other organism wants -
         | maximal exploitation of a niche by a lineage. Each adaptation
         | that survives overwhelmingly tends toward advantage in the
         | exploitation of a niche - fending off predation, establishing
         | control over resources, symbiotic support, parasitic drain, and
         | a myriad other capabilities that are highly environment
         | dependent.
         | 
         | Just look at antelope in north america - they evolved
         | incredible speed and agility in order to outrun and evade
         | megafauna predators, but there's nothing left nearly fast
         | enough to be a threat to them. Environments can change, and
         | leave an organism with features that are no longer necessary or
         | even beneficial in terms of overall quality of life and energy
         | efficiency. The slightest noise can disturb a herd of antelope
         | into bolting as if there were prairie lions or sabertooth
         | tigers on the prowl. They don't need to be hypervigilant in the
         | same way, and it burns a lot of calories to move the way they
         | do, so whitetail deer and other slower species that aren't
         | quite as reactive or fast are better at exploiting the
         | ecosystem as it is.
         | 
         | With mushrooms that have mysterious chemistry, there will be a
         | lot of those sorts of vestigial features. Extinct species of
         | insects and animals and plants will have been the target of
         | specific features, or they might end up in novel environments
         | where other features are particularly suitable, but some become
         | completely counterproductive in practice.
         | 
         | As far as psilocybe mushrooms go, in lower quantities, they
         | actually provide a cognitive advantage sufficient to make a
         | symbiotic relationship plausible between mammals and the
         | mushrooms, albeit indirect. Animals under low levels of
         | psilocybin influence have better spatial perception, can better
         | spot movement in low light conditions, and there's a slight
         | reduction in the neural influence of trauma inspired networks.
         | Large quantities can be beneficial in a number of abstract
         | ways. Any animal that sought those mushrooms out could thereby
         | gain adaptive advantage over competitors that didn't partake.
         | 
         | Having an extremely toxic substance might be useful for killing
         | large organisms and their decomposition either feeding the
         | fungi directly, or feeding the organisms beneficial to the
         | fungi. This can be plants, other fungi, or the feces of
         | scavengers. Horizontal transfer might occur if there's an
         | initial beneficial relationship, animals like the smell and
         | taste of a thing, and then the fungi picks up the killing
         | poison, and the consequences are sufficiently beneficial to
         | outbreed the safe ones.
         | 
         | If too many become deadly, animals get killed off, and the non-
         | deadly ones tend to gain the upper ground, since they aren't
         | spending any resources on producing any poisons. Where there's
         | a balance of intermittent similar but poisonous mushrooms, they
         | take down enough animals to optimize their niche.
         | 
         | There are dozens of such indirect webs of influences and
         | consequences that spread from seemingly simple adaptations, and
         | it's amazing that things seem so balanced and stable as they
         | do. It's a constant arms race of attacks and temptations and
         | strategies.
        
         | TheCraiggers wrote:
         | Two things:
         | 
         | 0) Humans (and even our recent ancestors) eating you are a very
         | recent thing to be concerned about, numbers-wise. By the time
         | our numbers were enough to provide evolutionary pressure, we
         | started farming what we wanted, which kinda breaks the process.
         | Also. most poisons don't effect everything equally, so what
         | might prevent a horse from eating you might taste delicious to
         | us (like the nightshade family) or even be _sought after_ for
         | other reasons, like capsaicin.
         | 
         | 1) You're succumbing to the usual evolution fallacy. Evolution
         | doesn't _want_ anything more than 1 and 1 want to be 2. It 's
         | just a process, and sometimes (hell maybe even often) it
         | doesn't work in a linear fashion. Lots of "X steps back, Y
         | steps forward", and oftentimes each of those steps can take
         | anything from decades to centuries or more to make, and by the
         | time it happens what was pressuring that change is gone.
         | 
         | So many people, even when they obviously know better, like to
         | think of evolution as _intelligent_. It 's obviously not. But
         | every time someone says stuff like this, it reinforces the
         | fallacy and then we get people saying things like "if evolution
         | is real, why come $insane_argument_against_evolution?"
        
           | malux85 wrote:
           | Also way too biased to humans, the fact that they poison us
           | could just be a biochemistry coincidence, the author is
           | operating from a very human-centric POV (like you say in (0))
        
           | VanshPatel99 wrote:
           | I would expect this way of thinking about evolution would be
           | common but unfortunately it isn't. I feel the way we say "X
           | animal evolved to do Y" sets the ton as if it was a active,
           | thought out decision. Instead, it was just 1000s of mutation
           | happened and maybe a certain kind was able to survive while
           | other wasn't. It is more of a mathematical concept than
           | conscious one.
        
             | uh_uh wrote:
             | I find it hard to believe that evolution is completely
             | blind. The search space that it can explore via mutations
             | is astronomically large. Considering that the experiment is
             | run at planet-scale over billions of years doesn't really
             | save the argument as it takes some specimen years to
             | develop and get feedback on their fitness. It's hard to
             | believe that it's truly just random "bit-flips".
             | 
             | I'm not trying to suggest woo here, but there has to be
             | some mechanisms to constrain the search space somewhat.
        
               | lotsofpulp wrote:
               | That mechanism is a set of genes failing to procreate.
        
               | yes_man wrote:
               | Epigenetics can arguably be an example of what the
               | comment means by narrowing the search space. You can have
               | heritable changes to gene expression that are not part of
               | your genome, but are a result of feedback from the
               | environment (and not random mutations, viability of which
               | natural selection will judge over future generations)
        
               | DonHopkins wrote:
               | As a general rule of thumb:
               | 
               | truth = claim.replace(/I'm not (.*?), but (.*)/, "I'm
               | $1.");
               | 
               | Then again this is a discussion about "Experts explore
               | new mushroom which causes fairytale-like hallucinations"
               | so maybe woo is appropriate, and you should embrace it.
        
               | wyldfire wrote:
               | > some mechanisms to constrain the search space somewhat.
               | 
               | Your perspective has the unfortunate bias of being posed
               | at the end of a long stream of evolution that happened to
               | emerge with an intelligence far superior from other
               | living things.
               | 
               | > Considering that the experiment is run at planet-scale
               | over billions of years
               | 
               | It's not just planet-scale, it's universe-scale. Lots of
               | planets conduct the experiment, ours just happens to have
               | resulted in intelligence.
               | 
               | > It's hard to believe that it's truly just random "bit-
               | flips".
               | 
               | Mutations introduce randomness but beneficial traits can
               | be selected for artificially, compounding the benefits.
        
           | fc417fc802 wrote:
           | While your objection is technically correct it can still be
           | useful (ie simple, straightforward, etc) to phrase things in
           | terms of a goal. Since a goal (pursued by an intelligent
           | being) and optimization pressure (a property of a blind
           | process) are approximately the same thing in the end. In
           | other words, Anthropomorphization can be useful despite not
           | being true in a literal sense.
           | 
           | Certainly this can be misleading to the layman. The term
           | "observer" in quantum mechanics suffers similarly.
        
             | IanCal wrote:
             | It's a useful start to move away from "it's just random"
             | but it's just so different it doesn't help in many cases.
             | It's not approximately the same.
        
             | PaulDavisThe1st wrote:
             | No.
             | 
             | "Optimization pressure" makes it sound as if there is a
             | single metric for optimization, whereas there are a
             | constantly shifting set of different metrics. Worse (or
             | more precisely, more complex) there are frequently multiple
             | different "solutions" for a given metric, and evolution
             | doesn't care. Put a little differently, there is no
             | "optimization" pressure at all: evolution is not attempting
             | to optimize anything ( _).
             | 
             | Trying to fit anthropomorphized design onto a process that
             | is absolutely the opposite of that in every way (no intent,
             | multiple outcomes, no optimization) just leads people to
             | not think clearly about this sort of thing.
             | 
             | (_) no, not even "reproductive fitness" - rates of
             | reproduction are subject to massive amounts of
             | environmental "noise", to the degree that minor
             | improvements in offspring survivability will often be
             | invisible over anything other than the very long term.
             | Further, the most desirable rates of reproduction will also
             | vary over time, leading to what once may have appeared to
             | be an improvement into a liability (and vice versa, of
             | course).
        
             | gary_0 wrote:
             | A more intuitive and natural phrasing, even though it's
             | invalid in a technical sense. I've noticed this happens
             | when people talk about computers/software as well ("it
             | thinks the variable is set", "it freaks out if it doesn't
             | get a response", etc). Outside of formal
             | writing/presentations, using only technical terminology
             | seems to take a suboptimal amount of effort for both
             | speaker and listener compared to anthropomorphizing
             | (unless, as you mention, the listener is a layman who gets
             | the wrong idea).
        
           | Sharlin wrote:
           | 0) What do humans have to do with it? We're not the only
           | animals eating mushrooms.
        
         | kgwxd wrote:
         | Some are _saying_ : "Don't come anywhere near me". Others are
         | are _saying_ : "Take a little, I'll show you a good time. Take
         | too much... I will make you end your own life."
        
           | bdangubic wrote:
           | what others are saying works for hotdogs too :)
        
         | RajT88 wrote:
         | > And the poisonous ones apparently don't use color as a
         | warning signal, and don't smell all that bad, and some of the
         | poisons have really mild effects, like "gives only some people
         | diarrhea" or "makes a hangover worse".
         | 
         | Some of the poisonous ones even taste really good, and don't
         | start making you sick for a day or two (and then you die
         | horribly). You hear about it from time to time, where people
         | have the best dinner of their life and then are dead.
        
           | decimalenough wrote:
           | You're likely referring to the death cap (Amanita
           | phalloides), which is reportedly quite tasty. But there's
           | also a mushroom that's both deadly poisonous and a sought-
           | after, commercially sold delicacy, the only difference being
           | the method of preparation:
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gyromitra_esculenta
           | 
           | Although recent research suggests that some poison remains
           | even after careful preparation, and that consumption may even
           | be linked to ALS (Lou Gehrig's disease).
        
         | sans_souse wrote:
         | I dig your style, you sound like my inner monologue :D
        
         | ACCount37 wrote:
         | Natural selection cuts both ways.
         | 
         | Sure, many things evolved to be less edible. But humans
         | themselves are hunter-gatherer omnivores - who evolved to be
         | very good at eating a lot of very different things. There are
         | adaptations in play on both ends.
         | 
         | There are, in fact, many countermeasures that would deter other
         | animals, but fail to deter humans. In part due to some liver
         | adaptations, in part due to sheer body mass, and in part due to
         | human-specific tricks like using heat to cook food.
         | 
         | If your countermeasures just so happen to get denaturated by
         | being heated to 75C, good luck getting humans with them. It's
         | why a lot of grains or legumes are edible once cooked but
         | inedible raw. The same is true for many "mildly poisonous"
         | mushrooms - they lose their toxicity if cooked properly.
         | 
         | Those countermeasures don't have to be lethal to deter
         | consumption! If something causes pain, diarrhea or indigestion,
         | or some weirder effects, or just can't be spotted or reached
         | easily, that can work well enough. So the evolutionary pressure
         | to always go for highly lethal defenses isn't there. It's just
         | one pathway to take, out of many, and evolution will roll with
         | whatever happens to work best at the moment.
         | 
         | Human takeover of the biosphere is a recent event too, and
         | humans are still an out-of-distribution threat to _a lot_ of
         | things. So you get all of those weird situations - where
         | sometimes, humans just blast through natural defenses without
         | even realizing they 're there, and sometimes, the defenses work
         | but don't work very well because they evolved to counter
         | something that's not a human, and sometimes, the defenses don't
         | exist at all because the plant's environment never pressured it
         | to deter consumption by large mammals at all.
         | 
         | And with the level of control humans attained over nature now?
         | The ongoing selection pressure is often shaped less like "how
         | to deter humans" and more like "how to attract humans", because
         | humans will go out of their way to preserve and spread things
         | they happen to like.
        
       | anthk wrote:
       | That reminds me of Mckenna/Peter Meyer and the fractal time.
       | 
       | https://www.fractal-timewave.com/articles.php
       | 
       | You can get a free-libre Unix timewave generator there:
       | 
       | https://github.com/kl4yfd/timewave_z3r0
       | 
       | It's a bit pseudo-science but some Chinese wrote an article on
       | the I-Ching and patterns and it can have a bit of truth on it.
       | 
       | https://vixra.org/abs/2409.0093 [ Chinese, use whatever tool you
       | like to translate it]
       | 
       | I said this because both Mckenna and Peter did writtings about
       | DMT and the experiences under it:
       | 
       | https://scribe.rip/illumination/terence-mckenna-explores-the...
       | 
       | >Terence had symbolically left a single mushroom standing in the
       | middle of the hut. As they sat there, for a fleeting moment
       | Terence saw "not a mature mushroom but a planet, the earth,
       | lustrous and alive, blue and tan and dazzling white." Dennis saw
       | the exact same image and concluded the experiment had been a
       | success. Terence was not convinced.
       | 
       | I saw this in a dream too; but I remember descending uber fast
       | from space to home, as if I were in a amusement ride, that one
       | where you are dropped at high speeds from a fair height, but with
       | far more vertigo. Also, I was in space in some kind of a capsule
       | before the jump.
        
       | kylehotchkiss wrote:
       | Author flies around the world to find a shroom that makes reality
       | feel like Super Mario and didn't even bite into one... lost
       | opportunity
        
       | oytis wrote:
       | Experts
        
       | OhMeadhbh wrote:
       | Hmm... having trouble getting _that_ URL. Archive.org has a
       | recent snapshot at
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20251226204255/https://nhmu.utah...
        
       | Bjorkbat wrote:
       | I'm sure there's some boring neuro-chemical explanation for this,
       | and I won't doubt or deny the neuro-chemical explanation, but the
       | fact that there's a mushroom that consistently brings about
       | hallucinations of tiny people is so bizarre that I kind of want
       | to indulge in equally bizarre explanations. Maybe it's not a
       | hallucination and this mushroom simply allows us to see the tiny
       | people all around us. Maybe mushrooms are intelligent and are
       | intentionally making us hallucinate tiny people.
       | 
       | It's a little bit crazy, I know, but it's odd to me that
       | evolutionary forces would produce a mushroom that makes you have
       | some specific hallucinations, rather than simply make things
       | swirl together or simply produce intense feelings of euphoria or
       | dread. I mean, marijuana just gets you high and that's that.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-12-26 23:00 UTC)