Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!
MushroomJohn pointed me to the article on Panaeolina/Psathyrella Foenisecii. I would like to bring up some of the things coming to mind on this topic.
1. Basically P. Foenisecii has been reported to cause some poisonings in small children, which may not be due to psilocybin/psilocin.
2. Although not active, P. Foenisecii has at times had small levels of psilocybin, very rarely (if not confused with some other look-alike species).
3. Panaeolus castaneifolius (Murr.) Ola'h=Panaeolina castaneifolius, or even P. Subbalteatus could be confused as P. Foenisecii and that could be the reason why psychoactive properties have been found.
Regarding number two on your listr. Panaeolina has never had any small amounts of psilocine or psilocybine in them.
They do have other non-psychoactive tryptamines but never any psilocine/psilocybine.
Many guides still carry that in their books as correct info.
No one has bothered to correct any of these mycologists of their errors excopept for a few people like me and sometimes a few others like Merlin, Stijve. Even Paul Stamets has not corrected his erors regarding my mu7shroom Psilocybe samuiensis inhis book or errors int he complete mushroom cultivator and then thyere area all of the straight myucologists who do not like magic shrooms or even the people who eat them. They always list them as poisonous/hallucinogenic and/or toxic.
Also those small children who allegedly ate Panaeolina foensecii, half/assed identified over phones and at emegrgency rooms by doctors who are m not mycologist, also failed to mention that one or two shrooms eaten byu a child is kinda doubtful as children spit out things which taste bitter or nasty. And according tot he many field guides which say active or if eaten in large amounts, such a large amount of shrooms still would not affect a child who ate one or two mushrooms in a garden or lawn.
Let us not forget the major error of the six-year-old Kelso, Wshington Child who accidently died after his family made a meal of mushrooms fromtheir lawn. The shrooms were identified by Rolf Singer as Psilocybe baeocystis, thus earning a watch out for the dangerous mushroom which is fatal to children. Well I also researched the information and obtained a photograph (polaroid) taken by a doctor who published the data in a medical Journal. The image in the phot is Psilocybe cyanescens. Not P. baeocystis.
And remember the mother and her two teenage children in Menton France in 1960 who ate two fressh ounces of Copelandia cyanescens in a bowl of soup. They had a somewhat scary and yet at the same time, euphoric trip which they would never do again. The earliest known report of a psilocybian intoxication formt he UK occurred int he late3 17990 in London where a father and four children consumed liberty caps. It is in the 1800 e3dition of the London MEdical and Physical journal and is posted at my site inthe grape Vine section. Under accidental ingestions. A section which soon will add dozens of first hand medical reports of emergency room treatments.
So these doctors w and mycologists who wrote of panaeolina as dangerous to children in the grazing stage is incorrect and wrong and they, although they personally agreed with me in private communications (U.S. Mail) That there was no way Panaeolina foenisecii caused the problems inn these children in my article, as it so states there.