• Psychedelic Drugs Welcome Guest
    View threads about
    Posting RulesBluelight Rules
    PD's Best Threads Index
    Social ThreadSupport Bluelight
    Psychedelic Beginner's FAQ

Bluelight Members Should Lead the Boycott Against NBXX

jason7 said:
they can be dangerous if people don't read about them first and properly measure out reasonable doses.
Click to expand...

true for any substance. all drugs should be sold with information, not that that stops people from dying from paracetamol but still...

this thread is 'stupid' i find the other one 'can nbomes be safe' much more productive and less disturbing.
 
Why don't BL members lead the boycott against Big Tobacco? Or alcohol distilleries? Or pharmaceutical companies churning out OTC/OTS painkillers, responsible for more ODs every day than NBXX in a year?

WHY NOT?






They were rhetorical questions, by the way. While I understand where you're coming from, I can't agree with it entirely. People are responsible for their own choices; the best we can hope for is to educate them prior, so they make the safest, most informed decision they can.

Personally I fucking LOVED 25i-NBOMe. You want to take that away from me, even though I know how to practice 'safe' drug use even with such compounds? HA! No.
 
I personally agree that the NBXX family is trash and I want nothing to do with them, and I have no problem telling that to people when they ask for advice regarding them. My first and only experience with them was when I was given a hit of one of them (god knows which one) under the guise of it being LSD. I had never encountered acid mimics before that and didn't even realize that these type of RCs existed. Luckily, I was fine but the trip was really uncomfortable and made me feel quite sick. Only afterwards, when I did a little digging, did I learn that this was a wide-reaching problem and that some kids had died from taking this shit. However, I believe that Bluelight is a valuable source for harm-reduction advice. Although I rarely post, I have lurked this site for years for this very purpose. If people know what drug they have and want to learn as much as they can about it before they take it, more power to them. I just think it would be hypocritical to have a policy encouraging harm-reduction and education about some drugs but have a strict 'abstinence only'/'don't do this' stance on others. That sounds like it would do more harm than good.
 
The way I see it is nbome are chemically the benzofury version of the DOx's.

Benzofury was always a thing that people took because MDMA was in short supply (after the big clampdown in malaysia or wherever it was and the international precursor law changes).

When mdma came back people people started taking that again. Then shortly afterwards benzofury was banned. Not many people cared because MDMA was back. (Ok some people cared because they have to take legal highs for whatever life reasons...but I don't think many other people lost much sleep over it?)

I guess with nbome people are taking it because it's legal and readily available. As soon as it becomes controlled (soon) then people will revert back to taking DOx and whatever else they feel like doing.

Personally I have never tried nbome and probably never will; but who am I to say that people shouldnt? I have read some TRs which make it sound pretty interesting (full agonist? that's not a common property) and also some TRs which make it sound pretty dangerous (full agonist? I need some of my own neurotransmitters to be able to bind with receptors, that sounds dangerous...)

I don't know what I'm trying to say here; I guess it is live and let live, and don't worry about it because it will disappear soon enough anyway. Not that that is a good thing, because if you aren't of the opinion that all drugs should be legal, you are (in my opinion) on the wrong forum.
 
Last edited:
DOXs are crazy long, have an anxious come-up, don't kick in for a few hours, are less visual, and are less potent than the nBOMes.

Don't get me wrong, I love DOC, but DOX scarcity is not fueling the nBOME problem. nBOMES are a better LSD-mimic, that's all. That, and I believe they're cheaper.
 
When users come here inquiring into NBXX, I urge each one of you to tell them not to do it, and explain exactly why. In particular, stop indulging NBXX-LSD comparison threads, as this further solidifies the notion of NBXX as replacement for LSD.
Click to expand...

I think this is the bit I agree with most. I know a few personal friends who would probably be capable of taking NBXX compounds safely, but I personally don't have any desire to do so and if someone I don't know asks my advice over the internet my answer is simply going to be "don't take it."
 
InterestingFACT said:
DOXs are crazy long, have an anxious come-up, don't kick in for a few hours, are less visual, and are less potent than the nBOMes.

Don't get me wrong, I love DOC, but DOX scarcity is not fueling the nBOME problem. nBOMES are a better LSD-mimic, that's all. That, and I believe they're cheaper.
Click to expand...

Lsd isn't very visual. Why take an Lsd mimic when you could just take the real thing...it's not like it's scarce. I think people who take nbome think it's got a cool name or whatever. Very much doubt it has anything to do with a supposed similarity to Lsd, because ultimately it is nothing like Lsd in the slightest apart from being a serotogenic psychedelic. It's not even from the same chemical family of psychedelics, it has a different binding pattern and a completely different physical safety profile.
 
kyt said:
Lsd isn't very visual. Why take an Lsd mimic when you could just take the real thing...it's not like it's scarce. I think people who take nbome think it's got a cool name or whatever. Very much doubt it has anything to do with a supposed similarity to Lsd, because ultimately it is nothing like Lsd in the slightest apart from being a serotogenic psychedelic. It's not even from the same chemical family of psychedelics, it has a different binding pattern and a completely different physical safety profile.
Click to expand...
Of course it's nothing like lsd. But to a novice to hallucinogens, it's much more likely to pass as lsd. This is because everyone expects visuals, and it gives you plenty. And it kicks in at a suitable time, rather than after 2 hours and peaking at 6 hours.
 
phatass said:
are you stricktly talking about nboh's or nbomes too?

With recently aquiered knowledge, and despite two amazing trips on 25i-nbome, i have to agree with your point of view OP, having dug further and done more research (erowid has a new nbome related deaths page) i know i won't be touching these again, as enjoyable as they may have been... it's frightening stuff
Click to expand...
NBOMe, NBOH, NBF, ... the entire class. I agree that they much more dangerous than most psychedelics, that most people have no business touching the powders, ....

The only thing I don't agree with is that they shouldn't be available at all.
 
wayab said:
hahahaha :D this is a joke right ? :sus:



ever hear of the saying "variety is the spice of life"? 8)
Click to expand...

ever heard of the 20 or so other things I'd rather put in my body?

Why would I take a shitty nbome when theres a fuckload of good phens and good trypts to try?

The only joke is how ignorant some people are. LSD is not very visual, not until you push the dosage high. Not compared to some of the more visual compounds. Like some of the good phens and trypts that are out there, which are visual at low doses.

Maybe you should take a look at pihkal and tihkal and read some TRs on erowid because apparently you are a little bit clueless.
 
careful about throwing stones, or calling people clueless who are not clueless.
I would dare to say you have no idea what makes a compound visual or at what dose that begins, since many factors are involved and these have not been mapped properly in science yet.
therefore you can't assume to know what is what, or when another member is totally out to lunch.

many interesting psychedelic compounds exist with various toxicity profiles.
IMO only LSD and Salvia are physically NON-HARMFUL.

I am not always interested in salvia.
I am not always ready for an 8 hour excursion

I am careful with nbome, and it serves an in between requirement, and I am aware enough of it's potential harm character.

being aware of what it is capable of is essential.

that said, I am very unhappy that it exists on the market in a powder, which makes all powdered substances dangerous until properly and safely identified.

Be careful of what you assume is all I can say. test all powders and titrate all new blotters.
 
pupnik said:
careful about throwing stones, or calling people clueless who are not clueless.
I would dare to say you have no idea what makes a compound visual or at what dose that begins, since many factors are involved and these have not been mapped properly in science yet.
therefore you can't assume to know what is what, or when another member is totally out to lunch.

many interesting psychedelic compounds exist with various toxicity profiles.
IMO only LSD and Salvia are physically NON-HARMFUL.

I am not always interested in salvia.
I am not always ready for an 8 hour excursion

I am careful with nbome, and it serves an in between requirement, and I am aware enough of it's potential harm character.

being aware of what it is capable of is essential.

that said, I am very unhappy that it exists on the market in a powder, which makes all powdered substances dangerous until properly and safely identified.

Be careful of what you assume is all I can say. test all powders and titrate all new blotters.
Click to expand...

The biggest problem I have is that the nxxx substances are being touted as the same as lsd. Then naive people over dose because they are told it is "a better LSD mimic" when in fact that is not the case. If people want to use drugs responsibly that's their business and should be free to do so.

However, posting misleading statements on forums is as equally irresponsible as misrepresenting something for sale or given away for free; it is a dangerous practice that could potentially cause harm.

I don't know what makes one compound more or less visual than another (if I did though you would have incorrectly assumed something about me!). I will call someone out though if they claim:

"But to a novice to hallucinogens, it's much more likely to pass as lsd. This is because everyone expects visuals, and it gives you plenty. And it kicks in at a suitable time, rather than after 2 hours and peaking at 6 hours."

Because this is a morally bad statement to make.

For christ sakes, if we keep calling the drugs we so adore "hallucinogens" and trying to pass them off for LSD... then yeah, the ban hammer of law is going to come down, and the people who need to stay on the right side of the law will be forced towards even newer and less researched chemicals, with no documented safety profiles. Is this a good idea?

Also why should people expect super crazy visuals on LSD? it's because of all the (anti-drug) propaganda which deliberately fails to accurately surmise what a LSD (or psychedelic in general) experience is. Why then, should we, as the supposedly enlightened, continue to propagate information which was originally intended to undermine the very things we enjoy? (rhetorical)
 
kyt said:
The biggest problem I have is that the nxxx substances are being touted as the same as lsd. Then naive people over dose because they are told it is "a better LSD mimic" when in fact that is not the case. If people want to use drugs responsibly that's their business and should be free to do so.

However, posting misleading statements on forums is as equally irresponsible as misrepresenting something for sale or given away for free; it is a dangerous practice that could potentially cause harm.

I don't know what makes one compound more or less visual than another (if I did though you would have incorrectly assumed something about me!). I will call someone out though if they claim:

"But to a novice to hallucinogens, it's much more likely to pass as lsd. This is because everyone expects visuals, and it gives you plenty. And it kicks in at a suitable time, rather than after 2 hours and peaking at 6 hours."

Because this is a morally bad statement to make.

For christ sakes, if we keep calling the drugs we so adore "hallucinogens" and trying to pass them off for LSD... then yeah, the ban hammer of law is going to come down, and the people who need to stay on the right side of the law will be forced towards even newer and less researched chemicals, with no documented safety profiles. Is this a good idea?

Also why should people expect super crazy visuals on LSD? it's because of all the (anti-drug) propaganda which deliberately fails to accurately surmise what a LSD (or psychedelic in general) experience is. Why then, should we, as the supposedly enlightened, continue to propagate information which was originally intended to undermine the very things we enjoy? (rhetorical)
Click to expand...
I'm not defending NBOMe. But you're ignorant if you think it's popular due to a lack of availability of DOx. It's popular because scam artists can make a quick buck off of it. A faster buck than with any other RC. Of course it's immoral to pass shit off as lsd. But you can't pretend that it doesn't happen.

Whether or not you like nbomes is irrelevant. The problem is that they're dangerous.
 
I think one of the OP's most valid points isn't getting enough discussion, the extremely negative press that came along with the NBxx's. Like the OP said, one of the strongest arguments for our side of things was the relative physiological safety of most psychedelic compounds.


I am all about personal accountability, and freedom to do what you choose with your brain. At the same time, I have to look at the bigger picture. If the goal is to eventually legitimize psychedelics, the NBxx series will do nothing but hinder that process. We should try not to give any more ammo to the opposition.

There has to be a happy medium, and I have a hunch that a bit of self regulation within the community should be a part of the approach.
 
TurkeyRanch said:
If the goal is to eventually legitimize psychedelics, the NBxx series will do nothing but hinder that process. We should try not to give any more ammo to the opposition.

There has to be a happy medium, and I have a hunch that a bit of self regulation within the community should be a part of the approach.
Click to expand...

I did not realize that bluelight.org was a community promoting the legalization of drugs,
I thought the subtext was harm-reduction by even handed and even minded information sharing,
in a web community of psychonauts and other substance users.

if this community has political intentions it may be hard to stay even handed
 
pupnik said:
I did not realize that bluelight.org was a community promoting the legalization of drugs,
I thought the subtext was harm-reduction by even handed and even minded information sharing,
in a web community of psychonauts and other substance users.

if this community has political intentions it may be hard to stay even handed
Click to expand...

I didn't say legalize, I said legitimize. I am not making any statements about Bluelight. I was trying to point out in general that the greater psychedelic community (which Bluelight is a part of) may be shooting itself in the foot with the NBxx's, due to the many reasons others have already stated in this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top