What a fascinating article. I am definitely a science nerd but I am typically at a much larger scale, in rehabilitation, but with your refresher on the bonds and the graphics to support, I was able to follow and I learned quite a bit today about the chemicals that I have come to resepect deeply.
I was recently hearing about the popular fly agaric, with its muscimol, being ingested in two manners: oral ingestion and combusted within its own cap. The one who ate it reported feeling "drunk" which makes sense with it's depressive and sedative actions on the body. This article made me curious about if one of those methods has a large advantage over another, as far as availability to the receptors?
RE: Why is Psilocin Orally Active?