The Big and Dandy NBOMe-2C-C (25C-NBOMe) Thread

[psood0nym]

Well, at the last possible day she could arrive and still be “this week” my package was waiting in the mail this fine morning. As promised, I IMd ~50 ug, then ~50 ug more about a half hour later. I haven’t noticed any unexpected increase in potency or in the speed of onset relative to the other ROAs reported here, at least not to any degree more than would be expected using IM over insufflated or rectal with other substances.

It’s now 2 hours after that first dose and I just finished off a full mg IM. It’s impossible to say how much of that mg has been absorbed by developing tolerance during the interim hours but, oh well, there you have it.

In a few hours the university theater is screening Gaspar Noe's “Enter the Void,” so I wanted to prepare. Prior to this last injection, I felt less as though I would be entering a void and more that I would merely be a wallflower on the dance floor of oblivion. Now things are getting more interesting. It’s very lucid, the most lucid psychedelic I’ve ever used. Like water into water, any one of its psychic manifestations blends into the innumerable perturbations of the others. It’s just as I imagined a highly-selective 5-HT2a agonist would be.

It’s what in my more ignorant days I imagined “clean” LSD would feel like, before I got a look at the list of receptors she gets down with and found out what a skank Lucy really is.

 

[psood0nym]

I really like this drug. It makes me wonder how much I could take without losing it. It's that clear headed. The visuals are pretty spectacular: for instance, when I washed my face with my gf's red towel and took the towel away from my face I saw a bunch of "psystrings" of the same color as the towel. I noticed a few other psystrings of different colors hooked into the red string, and, not by coincidence I think, they were the same hue of green as the decorative circles on her shower curtain just adjacent the towel.

What's interesting is how salient the visuals are and how much they incorporate features of the environment into their production in ways that appear to be somewhat systematic. That's what's unique abut the visuals of this drug. They are very clearly "there" and are three dimensional, but despite their salience cognitively I remain near normal. It would be interesting to set up a poster, with various colors and patterns next to a blank white wall, to see if by staring at the colors and patterns on the poster I could reproduce them on the white wall next to the poster, by "dipping" my visual memory in "red," for example, then seeing if red string patterns emerge on the wall projection. Perhaps I could deduce some inference rules of psychedelic projection from such a contrivance. There did seem to be an associative intelligence behind the features visuals had assigned to them (for example, the red towel string visuals occurring immediately after using a frayed red towel to dry my face). It could be a way to peak behind the scenes of perception and literally see how our minds use specific environmental cues to project specific and predictable hallucinatory projections. Playing such a "game" could be a first step to helping us to start to learn the mental and perceptual rules for how to consciously manipulate the production of visuals.

 

[psood0nym]

So after class this morning I started IMing this again. It's been two days since I last, and first, used it and I was able to trip decently for a few hours off of 1 mg earlier this afternoon. The tolerance was clearly reduced but far from gone. It's been about five hours since then and I recently IMd ~2.5 - 3 mg more over the course of about 40 minutes out of curiosity. I just finished the second half of that injection. The tolerance effects are definitely strong! I'm tripping, that's for sure, but only at around a ++. It takes about 20 minutes to start to kick in using IM. I expect it to build a little more yet but to remain easily manageable. I'll update if anything unexpected happens. Until then I'm going to amuse myself with a psychedelic trip to the local freak-run video store. Love those guys!

EDIT: It's 3 hrs later and I've added DXM, ondansetron, and ketamine into the mix. The dissociatives definitely make the 25C's effects more prominent. This chemical is extremely malleable. As I type this and glance around the room things appear essentially as they normally do, yet just a few minutes ago while listening to music the walls were crawling with multicolored clockwork. It's responsive to conscious attention in a way that could give this chemical a lot of utility. It's almost like I could go through a normal day like this and experience no hindrances from the chemical, but when I focus its effects start blooming around me.

I'm curious to hear any comparisons with other selective 5HT2a agonists. What accounts for the differences in their qualitative effects neurobiologically?

 

[krissilasn]

Could anyone go over the solubility of this chemical for me? I'm really incompetent with the search function +_+

Im interested in attaining some and when that time comes, I'd need to liquid measure it in and have it in a dropper for blotter or just dropping it on my tongue.

Putting an NBOMe on blotter and passing it off as acid wouldn't work because people would swallow the tabs and there'd be no effect. You'd piss a lot of people off because they didn't know how to properly dose.

I mean, yeah, LSD usually works better sublingual, but there's a good proportion of people who don't realize that.

Care to explain why putting it on blotter wouldn't be effective? I wanted to put some on blotter cause I just like dosing that way and I haven't had a reason to look at a nice sheet in a while. Just the logic I'm following is that since 25c-NBOMe is active sublingually you could stick blotter under your tongue? Or would this be highly ineffective?

 

[Blowmonkey]

It wouldn't be effective to sell it as acid; "because people would swallow the tabs and there'd be no effect", people generally just swallow a tab or blotter, not everyone exclusively usues it sublingually, which would be mandatory for an NBOMe.

 

[krissilasn]

I would never sell an RC as acid especially if this compound was orally active. That would cause a lot of serious complications and potential overdoses.

I just genuinely wanted to know if you left the blotter under or ontop of your tongue, would that work for dosing this compound. I don't have any ambition to pull out the rectal syringe again and Im taking a break from IV/IM.

There wouldn't be ANY sort of compound we could mix it with to make it orally active no?

 

[iblewafuseinmymind]

I really like this drug. It makes me wonder how much I could take without losing it. It's that clear headed. The visuals are pretty spectacular: for instance, when I washed my face with my gf's red towel and took the towel away from my face I saw a bunch of "psystrings" of the same color as the towel. I noticed a few other psystrings of different colors hooked into the red string, and, not by coincidence I think, they were the same hue of green as the decorative circles on her shower curtain just adjacent the towel.

What's interesting is how salient the visuals are and how much they incorporate features of the environment into their production in ways that appear to be somewhat systematic. That's what's unique abut the visuals of this drug. They are very clearly "there" and are three dimensional, but despite their salience cognitively I remain near normal. It would be interesting to set up a poster, with various colors and patterns next to a blank white wall, to see if by staring at the colors and patterns on the poster I could reproduce them on the white wall next to the poster, by "dipping" my visual memory in "red," for example, then seeing if red string patterns emerge on the wall projection. Perhaps I could deduce some inference rules of psychedelic projection from such a contrivance. There did seem to be an associative intelligence behind the features visuals had assigned to them (for example, the red towel string visuals occurring immediately after using a frayed red towel to dry my face). It could be a way to peak behind the scenes of perception and literally see how our minds use specific environmental cues to project specific and predictable hallucinatory projections. Playing such a "game" could be a first step to helping us to start to learn the mental and perceptual rules for how to consciously manipulate the production of visuals.

Really enjoyed that description. I've had experience myself with what appears to be the conscious manipulation of visuals which to me seems to be dependent on the lucidity of the experience. Sounds like this compound leaves a vast amount of room for complex intellectual interpretation. How long did it take to settle into the experience and how harsh was it?

 

[Erny]

So after class this morning I started IMing this again. It's been two days since I last, and first, used it and I was able to trip decently for a few hours off of 1 mg earlier this afternoon. The tolerance was clearly reduced but far from gone. It's been about five hours since then and I recently IMd ~2.5 - 3 mg more over the course of about 40 minutes out of curiosity. I just finished the second half of that injection. The tolerance effects are definitely strong! I'm tripping, that's for sure, but only at around a ++.

Now, after having done so, you'll have to wait two weeks for the tolerance to dissapear. It is that strong and takes that long, and it gets much stronger if you redose too early, like in 1 or 2 days.

I performed several experiments with 2C-B-NBOMe i/m 3 years ago, they weren't enough to find out how do the intramuscular ROA compares to insufflation or others ROA. But it seemed it was roughly equipotent if not somewhat more potent than insufflation, certainly more potent than sublingual. And it made measuring the exact dose much easier. I was able to distinguish between 100 and 200 or 300 mcg doses, there was certainly some activity at 100 mcgs though it was barely a +1.

And note how different is your experience with a milligram dose from what may one expect it to be if relying on my earliest description and recommendations, 300-600 mcgs as a normal dose. Individual dose is very variable for any of these substances.

Both for NBOMe-2C-C and NBOMe-2C-B normal doses remain below 1 mg or slightly more than that for most of the people. Less sensitive people may need around 1 mg as a normal dose for NBOMe-2C-C, and they will find NBOMe-2C-B to be either equipotent or somewhat less potent. I need ~ 1 mg for C and ~ 1,5 mg for B. Still, those who are the most sensitive would need around 500 mcgs as a normal dose for C, and perhaps up to 800 for B.

The dose range reported by different people for NBOMe-2C-I is even broader. Normal dose here is around 1 mg most frequently, but may vary from <1 mg at the lower end, and up to 3-5 mgs at the higher. That range is of almost an order of magnitude.

 

[Lombergerh]

Any information or assumptions about potency of 25E-NBOMe?

 

[Erny]

Any information or assumptions about potency of 25E-NBOMe?

There were few reports on it, the potency is roughly same as that of 2C-B-NBOMe, 500-800 mcgs should be safe for the majority I guess, some people would intend to take more. All the reports describe it as something not too tempting. Looks like it is to be a disappointment overall, especially if compared with the success of regular 2C-E.

 

[Blowmonkey]

Do you have any idea why Nichols presumably thinks of 2C-I-NBOMe as something "not psychedelic"..?

Fast forward to 22:10:
http://vimeo.com/16782003

 

[krissilasn]

Just a very great post over at drugs-forum that I'd love to share with bluelight.

Nichols stopped aiming to produce 5-HT agonists with pleasant/psychedelic effects some time ago, namely after the publication of the (in)famous pihkal and Shulgin's subsequent treat, tihkal.

The Ki of this one seems pretty low, perhaps to the point where it may be...oh, I dont know... a research tool? and not a psychedelic drug?

Br-dfly and other benzodifuran derivatives (especially fully planar dfly derivatives), as well as 25I-NBOH, 25I-NBOMe, TCB-2 and the rest of the illustrious products of the Nichols/Purdue lab which have ultrapotent/sub-milligram agonist activity are not toys.

These are tools for probing receptor activity, specifically and only 5-HT-2A/sometimesC receptors. They bind with an unbelievable affinity to these receptors and are thus very useful in research, not on blotters. Stay away from these chemicals. They are not formally tested in humans in any published document (not even rogue psychonaut publishing a la Alexander Shulgin), and may have long lasting, intense effects that may not be pleasant. Enzyme assays have yet to be done either, and we have no idea what the natural byproducts of the enzymatic degradation of these compounds are: for all we know (though unlikely), the compounds resulting from 25I-NBOH degradation could be potent neurotoxins.

If you must know however, unmonitored human trials have taken place under non-experimental conditions:

General consensus seems to be that 25I-NBOH shows no oral activity.

*Activity via sublingual or parenteral starts at well below one milligram (full activity at 500-700µg) and may be fatal in high doses.

*Doses lower than one milligram have reported some visual and cognitive activity, though reports are not detailed/well-defined.

*Doses above one-two milligram(s) have produced profound effects including severe confusion, disorientation, and overwhelming visual distortions.

*Doses of more than three milligrams may produce seizures and doses of less than ten milligrams may be fatal (shown in other n-benzyl derivatives).


I would say stay away from these ones until more is known, but if you or your friends decide to dive in, document everything, if nothing else than for the enrichment of human knowledge.

But seriously, leave the hyperpotent receptor agonists to the neuroscientists/neuropharmacologists. These are- in so many words- not to be 'played' with.

Not to say I fully agree with him. Though he proves a very valid point.

 

[Blowmonkey]

Though he proves a very valid point.

He really doesn't. His opinion is hypocritical (as if he's never taken an "RC"). Reports prove him wrong; people use these things as "psychedelics", just because they're extremely potent does not mean they're tools in neuropharmacology exclusively. That's a flawed way of thinking imo.

Shulgin never intended for his creations to be (ab)used so extensively. Neither was that Nichols intention. Alas, if you publish papers or write books like this, people will catch on to it. It's human nature to explore the unknown and wanting to expand the mind. These will be used by the drug taking culture they've helped to create; potent or not, selective for specific receptors or not, they pretty much all have "psychedelic potential", as this thread clearly has shown.

But yeah, what I do agree on with him is that people should take extreme caution when using these things, activity in the µg range is not to be taken lightly. Ofcourse they're not toys. I understand his concerns, I share most of them, but the way he tries to express his opinion comes over as elitist to me. Stay away from all (unresearched) drugs if you feel that way.

Now, on with the thread, SWIM wants to see more reports please.

 

[bluffythefluffy]

No drug is a toy - it is indeed silly to suggest that we in this community are so irresponsible.

 

[psood0nym]

Really enjoyed that description. I've had experience myself with what appears to be the conscious manipulation of visuals which to me seems to be dependent on the lucidity of the experience. Sounds like this compound leaves a vast amount of room for complex intellectual interpretation. How long did it take to settle into the experience and how harsh was it?

I took about 20 minutes using IM to really feel it, and I'd say around 40 to plateau. It's difficult to say for sure because the first time I used it I started with just ~ 100 ug and kept incrementing up, all the while tolerance was building, and this second time was just two days after, so who knows how much tolerance from the first time was muddling my ability to discern the onset of activity.

If you go back a couple of my posts to the first mini trip report you'll see I describe it as the most lucid psychedelic I've ever used, and even joked a little about taking massive doses just to see if they'd maintain this quality. Again, it's the malleability of it, the apparent ability to dial the amplitude of its intensity up and down with relative ease that's fueling this attitude. Another poster stated they thought it would be impossible to have a bad experience at the dose they took earlier. So it was about the least harsh psychedelic ever for me. No vasoconstriction and no increased mucus production, the latter of which I get with almost all psychedelics. Their was a little head fuck but it felt like the kind I might get pondering paradoxes sober rather than the kind occasionally encountered with other psyches which feels like short circuiting from biochemical chaff. The mental effects were much more about "lighting up the circuits," and intellectualizing. This happens on lots of psyches but this particular effect is another one that is more prominent for this compound relative to others for me. If I could "think myself" into tripping naturally my 25C-NBOMe experience is how I imagined that would be.

I was mostly focused on the visuals though, because those were simply the most stand out effects relative to others (typically OEVs bore me but these were fantastic, and, as stated, they had a responsiveness to attention and showed some striking correspondences to the patterns and colors in the environment that made them more intriguing. They were easily the most vivid relative to other psychedelic effects of any compound I've ever used.

I became really happy during the trip, but only after I focused on the effects. The intensity grew and grew and then, lo and behold, I had the classic perma-grin going. It never reached MDMA-like levels for me like others have reported. I actually got it hoping it would be like 2C-B or TMA-6, just a plush fun psyche I could use for anything, but I'm actually happier with these unexpected results.

Now, after having done so, you'll have to wait two weeks for the tolerance to dissapear. It is that strong and takes that long, and it gets much stronger if you redose too early, like in 1 or 2 days.

Thanks, this and your other comments are helpful. That's quite a range of dosages you gave. I was thinking about waiting a week and doing 1.5 - 2 mg straight off since it seems so easy to handle (yet there's a lot that's intriguing about it that's urging me to go quite a bit higher). But I think I'll hold off on your advice. It's a shame tolerance lingers for so long. I haven't been as excited about a single psychedelic as for this one for years (combinations of drugs (particularly DXM/ondansetron and ketamine/psilocin), yes, but not the effects of a single drug).

 

[CesarMillan]

Has there been any example in the past of a molecule that was subjectively pleasant and non-damaging, only to be later discovered as particularly harmful even in mildly active and infrequent dosages?

I wouldn't count MDMA, 2ct7 or Bromo-Dfly as examples of that because they've only caused serious problems when used irresponsibly.

 

[nuke]

^You may be right, I just didn't find anything in that specific search. Pictures of micelles remind my layman mind of soap, which emulsifies. The fact that just polysorbate 80 and licithin were mentioned makes it seem like you need a specific type of micelle when it comes to 25C-NBOMe, though, and I have no idea what qualifies. I'm not too bothered to find out though, since I'm just gonna do the elegant thing and stab it through the problem with a needle!

I think it's more the preparation of micelle that may matter more than the surfactant, but people will have to play around with it is my guess. In literature the preparations for micelles are generally done with a sonicator (a long needle-tipped apparatus that looks like this: http://i.ehow.com/images/a04/tq/36/sonication-work_-200X200.jpg ). These tend increase permeability of IP solutions as well if I recall correctly, but I might now.

 

[psood0nym]

^Interesting. But in theory shouldn't my have IMing it been as effective in increasing potency as the micelle prep? Or does the drug stay in encased in micelles in the body, which eventually aids in BBB permeability (or something; I'm just theorizing based on limited understanding here), and that's what accounts for such a large increase in potency? Alternatively, I could simply be more naturally tolerant to 25C and that explains why I needed so much more (I did ~200 ug in the first 40 minutes and was only at a plus 1), especially considering Erny's latest post testifying to the unusually vast range of natural tolerance exhibited by different people to it.

Anyone who's curious and doesn't mind trying IM but has tried other routes, wait a couple weeks since you last used for tolerance to return to normal and start your injection with the assumption that there will be an increase in potency similar to the figures cited earlier for the polysorbate 80 prep (a huge jump). If we see a similar big jump in potency we'll know it's most likely simply especially poor absorption through the mouth, rectum, or nasal membranes that accounts for the huge increase with polysorbate. However, if it's just a little more potent than those other methods via IM it'll be an indication something more is going on with the micelle prep.

Otherwise, in two weeks I can just try insufflation with a 1.5 mg over a couple hours (repeating my IM dose regimen that got me to full effects) instead of IMing it and that should tell me the same thing.

Has there been any example in the past of a molecule that was subjectively pleasant and non-damaging, only to be later discovered as particularly harmful even in mildly active and infrequent dosages?

Unfortunately, how a drug feels can't tell you anything for sure unless it does something really obvious soon after administration. One example that comes to mind is bio-accumulation (lead, mercury). A chemical feels fine or neutral and nothing happens right away, but one of its metabolites doesn't get broken down and builds to toxic levels after repeated use... There's a million other ways drugs can be damaging without being able to tell subjectively, I'm sure.

 

[atara]

Both for NBOMe-2C-C and NBOMe-2C-B normal doses remain below 1 mg or slightly more than that for most of the people. Less sensitive people may need around 1 mg as a normal dose for NBOMe-2C-C, and they will find NBOMe-2C-B to be either equipotent or somewhat less potent. I need ~ 1 mg for C and ~ 1,5 mg for B. Still, those who are the most sensitive would need around 500 mcgs as a normal dose for C, and perhaps up to 800 for B.

I got strong effects from 250 ug intranasal 25C-NBOMe. 400 ug was one of the most awesome experiences I've had. What sort of ROA are you using? Sublingual seems a little dodgy with this one, with the intranasal/rectal/intramuscular users reporting significantly lower doses than the sublingual users.

Has there been any example in the past of a molecule that was subjectively pleasant and non-damaging, only to be later discovered as particularly harmful even in mildly active and infrequent dosages?

The naphthoylalkylindoles JWH-018, JWH-019, JWH-073, JWH-122, and JWH-200 come to mind. They pose a significant cancer risk via a hepatic metabolism to epoxides -- the metabolic transformation of these compounds to epoxides was in fact confirmed and is not merely theoretical.

 

[Cuban]

The naphthoylalkylindoles JWH-018, JWH-019, JWH-073, JWH-122, and JWH-200 come to mind. They pose a significant cancer risk via a hepatic metabolism to epoxides -- the metabolic transformation of these compounds to epoxides was in fact confirmed and is not merely theoretical.

"Significant" is debatable as no research exists about carcinogenicity in vivo of these compounds. Further, provided you aren't putting grams to the head per month (and maybe not even then), the sheer amount of carcinogens in a JWH-XX laced material is less than smoking, comparably.

Note: I'm not saying JWH-XX is safe, per se, but that jumping to the conclusion it is a severe cancer risk is based on fear rather than any data. As always, proceed with caution and do your own research.