Detectability of 1BP-LSD: Under the Scrutiny of Drug Tests

The question of the detectability of psychoactive substances becomes significant, at the latest, when drug tests come into play: be it in traffic, in a professional context, or for forensic interest. With the emergence of new LSD derivatives like 1BP-LSD, a central question arises for many: Can these molecular variants even be detected? And if so, with which tests, within what timeframe, and with what consequences?

While standard drug tests provide clear answers for classic substances, the situation with LSD prodrugs quickly becomes complex. This is because what is actually detected in the body is often not the originally ingested compound, but its metabolite. This is precisely where a grey area begins, which is medically as well as legally interesting.

The following article illuminates how 1BP-LSD is metabolized in the body, why conventional drug tests often fail to detect it, and what challenges this poses for forensic practice.

Note: 1BP-LSD is not intended for human consumption. All described content is based on scientific sources or subjective experience reports and is not to be understood as instructions or recommendations.

To understand the detectability of a substance, one must first comprehend its journey through the body and its conversion—its metabolism. Like other LSD derivatives before it, 1BP-LSD is presumably a prodrug, whose journey in the body proceeds in two main stages.

The primary and most important step is the cleavage of the boron-containing heterocycle from the LSD basic structure, releasing the active LSD molecule. Studies with similar N1-substituted LSD analogs show that endogenous enzymes perform this process rapidly and efficiently. From this point on, the metabolic pathway is identical to that of conventional LSD.

Once LSD enters the body, it is primarily broken down in the liver by enzymes. These enzymes modify the LSD molecule through chemical reactions such as hydroxylation (addition of a hydroxyl group) and N-dealkylation (removal of methyl or ethyl groups).

This produces various metabolic products, known as metabolites. For forensic analysis, 2-oxo-3-hydroxy-LSD (O-H-LSD) is the most important metabolite. This is excreted in the urine over a longer period and is therefore the main target molecule in drug tests. O-H-LSD serves as clear proof of the consumption of LSD or its precursor substances in the body.

One of the most common questions in connection with drug use concerns detectability in standard drug tests, such as those used for employment screenings or traffic controls. LSD and its analogues are not detectable with common standard screening panels.

The reasons for this are purely pragmatic:

• Extreme Potency: Lysergic acid diethylamide is an extremely potent substance, taken in microgram doses. This leads to extremely low concentrations of the substance and its metabolites in urine or blood (often in the picogram to nanogram range per milliliter). These values are far below those of commonly consumed drugs such as cannabis, cocaine, or amphetamines, making detection possible only with highly sensitive and expensive testing procedures.

• Low Prevalence: The consumption of LSD is relatively low compared to other drugs. Therefore, routine screening would not be cost-effective for most applications.

To detect LSD, a specific test must be ordered. This process typically involves two stages:

1. Screening Test: An initial preliminary test, usually an immunoassay (such as the EMIT-II test), is used to quickly check a sample for the presence of LSD-like molecules. These tests rely on antibodies that bind to the target substance. They are fast and relatively inexpensive, but prone to false-positive results.

2. Confirmation Test: A positive screening test result must always be confirmed by a highly specific method. This is where procedures like gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) or, more commonly, liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) come into play. These methods can unambiguously identify and quantify molecules based on their exact mass and fragmentation pattern. They are the gold standard in forensic toxicology and can reliably detect even minute traces of LSD and its main metabolite O-H-LSD.

The duration for which 1BP-LSD or its metabolites are detectable depends heavily on the type of sample taken. Each sample type offers a different "diagnostic window" and is suitable for different questions.

• Blood: The detection window in blood is very short. LSD itself is detectable for only about 6 to 12 hours after ingestion. Blood tests are therefore primarily suitable for determining acute intoxication, for example after an accident or within clinical studies, but are unsuitable for detecting consumption that occurred longer ago.

• Urine: Urine samples are the most commonly used basis for drug tests. Since the main metabolite O-H-LSD is excreted in larger quantities and for longer than the parent substance, the detection window here is significantly longer. LSD and its metabolites can be detected in urine for up to 5 days after consumption.

• Hair: For detecting long-term or repeated consumption, hair analysis is the method of choice. When drugs circulate in the body, they are incorporated into growing hair follicles. Since hair grows on average about 1 cm per month, a 3 cm hair sample can provide information about consumption over the last three months. Theoretically, detection is possible as long as the hair is present. However, the substance only becomes detectable in hair that has grown out of the scalp about 2-3 weeks after consumption.

It is important to note that these time windows are only guidelines. Detectability can be influenced by various individual factors, such as dose, frequency of consumption, metabolism, body weight, age, health status (especially liver and kidney function), as well as fluid balance or the use of medication.

The existence of legal prodrugs such as 1BP-LSD or 1S-LSD presents forensic toxicology with a significant dilemma. Since 1BP-LSD is metabolized in the body into LSD and subsequently into its metabolites (such as O-H-LSD), a standard LSD drug test targeting LSD or O-H-LSD will yield a positive result – regardless of whether the substance originally consumed was illegal LSD or (currently) legal 1BP-LSD.

This leads to a situation where the tested person can credibly deny involvement due to a lack of clear evidence. They could claim to have consumed a research chemical that is legal in Germany, which a standard forensic laboratory would not be able to refute. This significantly complicates the legal distinction between the consumption of legal and illegal substances.

To achieve an unambiguous differentiation, a far more complex analytical approach would be required. One would need to specifically search for the unique metabolites of 1BP-LSD. However, these specific prodrug metabolites are likely to be present only in very low concentrations and only for a very short time after ingestion, before complete conversion to LSD occurs.

The development and validation of such highly specific tests are complex and expensive and are not performed in routine diagnostics.

This forensic grey area is a direct result of the cat-and-mouse game surrounding the production of 1BP-LSD and similar LSD alternatives. As long as chemists can develop new analogues faster than forensics can establish specific detection methods, legal prosecution of consumption based on drug tests will remain a challenge.

In summary, the detectability of 1BP-LSD is significantly more complex than it initially appears.

A normal urine test, such as those used in rapid drug tests, is not capable of detecting 1BP-LSD consumption or other LSD prodrugs. Standard drug screenings usually do not even test for illegal LSD products.

Only specialized forensic analyses can provide conclusions about consumption through the detection of LSD metabolites – however, without being able to clearly distinguish between illegal LSD and legal precursor substances. It is precisely this lack of differentiability that makes LSD prodrugs like 1BP-LSD a particular challenge for toxicology, jurisprudence, and regulation.

• Brandt, S. D., Kavanagh, P. V., Westphal, F., Stratford, A., Elliott, S. P., Dowling, G.,... & Halberstadt, A. L. (2016). Return of the lysergamides. Part I: Analytical and behavioural characterization of 1-propionyl-d-lysergic acid diethylamide (1P-LSD). Drug Testing and Analysis, 8(9), 891–902. https://doi.org/10.1002/dta.1884

• Dolder, P. C., Schmid, Y., Haschke, M., Rentsch, K. M., & Liechti, M. E. (2016). Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of lysergic acid diethylamide in healthy subjects. Clinical Pharmacokinetics, 55(10), 1219-1230.

• Halberstadt, A. L., Chatha, M., Klein, A. K., Wallach, J., Brandt, S. D., & Geyer, M. A. (2019). Pharmacological and biotransformation studies of 1-acyl-substituted derivatives of d-lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD). Neuropharmacology, 158, 107713. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropharm.2019.107713

• Luethi, D., Kaeser, M. A., Brandt, S. D., Liechti, M. E., & Krahenbuhl, S. (2019). In vitro metabolism of d-lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) in pooled human liver S9 and human monoamine oxidase A and B. Life sciences, 222, 111-118.

• Maurer, H. H. (2004). Multi-analyte procedures for screening for and quantification of drugs in blood, plasma, or serum by liquid chromatography-single stage or tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS or LC-MS/MS) relevant to clinical and forensic toxicology. Clinical Biochemistry, 37(7), 592-605.

• Patton AL, Karschner EL, Walterscheid JP, Garcia JM. Modification of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method targeting lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) and its primary metabolite (OH-LSD) to include nine LSD analogs. J Forensic Sci. 2024 Sep;69(5):1789-1798. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.15572.

• Poche, S., Dolder, P. C., Brandt, S. D., Liechti, M. E., & Weinmann, W. (2019). In vitro metabolic fate of nine LSD-based new psychoactive substances and their analytical detectability in different urinary screening procedures. Drug Testing and Analysis, 11(11-12), 1645-1656.

• Wachełko O, Nowak K, Tusiewicz K, Zawadzki M, Szpot P. A highly sensitive UHPLC-MS/MS method for determining 15 designer LSD analogs in biological samples with application to stability studies. Analyst. 2025 Jan 13;150(2):290-308. doi: 10.1039/d4an01361a.

• Wagmann, L., Brandt, S. D., Kavanagh, P. V., Maurer, H. H., & Meyer, M. R. (2017). In vitro metabolic fate of the lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD) derivative N6-ethyl-nor-LSD (ETH-LAD) in pooled human liver S9 and human monoamine oxidase A and B. Drug Testing and Analysis, 9(10), 1546-1554.