One of my favourite aya studies is a chemical composition analysis of 102 aya brews. Kaasik et al. found a range of ‘added’ chemicals in European samples & higher concentrations of DMT (av. 48% more) in neoshamanic vs. trad settings. Image of samples. (1/n)
Part of my research here investigates the experiential differences & functions of the different types of aya vines. There’s a vernacular taxonomy of ~9 vines (what I’ve found *so far*) but sci literature tends to group it all together (2/n)
Not all the variations of the vine are appropriate to use in the brew. (3/n)
& then there’s the vernacular taxonomy of the different chacruna leaves (again, only some can be used in the brew). Aya brew is the combination of aya vine, chacruna & sometimes admixture plants (4/n)
A range of admixture plants can be added to the brew depending on group needs and desired effects. (5/n)
In short, it’s a complicated web of plant and chemical interactions. The different vines have diff. effects & research needs to be aware of this to produce accurate and safe clinical (and other) recommendations. (6/n)
Without including traditional professional practitioners in this discussion scientific research runs the risk of only grasping part of the picture and missing potentially vital information. (7/n)
This connection b/w researcher and community is the marriage of humanities and scientific methods to develop a more holistic understanding of the phenomenon at hand. (8/8)

Recommended by
Recommendations from around the web and our community.

This is a great thread on 1) the difficulty of treating ayahuasca as a singular, standardized medicine, and 2) the importance of collaborating with indigenous healers whose botanical knowledge far exceeds our limited grasp of these species. Brew method is another big variable...