• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion


    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

Drugs Aren't Toys! Especially Research Chemicals!

nickthecheese

Bluelighter
Joined
Dec 8, 2001
Messages
2,551
After reading more than a few reports about research chemicals, i've become angry at the way people just seem to treat them as any other drug. In particular, the 5-MeO-XXXX series, the 2C-xxx series at sometimes rediculious levels.

No drug is a toy, not even panadol. Despite how "safe" you may think it is, despite how many of your friends have taken it and been ok, it isn't 100% safe.

Everone that intends to do any sort of drug should read this chunk of text below.

Experimental Chemicals & Research Chemicals
by Erowid

Chemicals marked by our Research Chemical Symbol should be considered experimental chemicals. Although some people are willing to ingest these chemicals for their effects, it is not reasonable to assume that these chemicals are in any way 'safe' to use recreationally. Although all psychoactive use involves risk, this class of chemicals has undergone virtually no human or animal toxicity studies and there is little to no data on possible long term problems, addiction potential, allergic reactions, or acute overdoses.

Publication of information by Erowid about human use of these chemicals is not intended to endorse their non-laboratory use. It is important to remember that reactions to psychoactives vary dramatically from person to person. Extrapolating anything from any single person's experience with a chemical is inappropriate and likely to result in dangerous and possibly fatal abreactions.
Some reports of use may include extremely glowing "wow"-type experiences. Reports of this nature should not be misunderstood to suggest that they are common nor typical of those who ingest the substance nor that the effects will be pleasant or desirable.
Users should consider carefully before choosing to work with these substances.

Research Chemical FAQ
v 1.1, Oct 23 2000
Credits
v 1.2 , Erowid, Oct 26, 2000, HTML, changes, additions
v 1.0 , Murple, Oct 22, 2000
v 0.5 , proto-faq , erowid, June 5, 2000

Questions:

1 What are research chemicals?
2 Are research chemicals safe to ingest?
3 This research chemical is very similar to a well known drug which is very safe. Doesn't that mean its safe too?
4 10 of my friends have tried this drug and they liked it, so its safe, right?
5 I read some trip reports about this chemical I want to try, but they're all so different! What are the effects of this drug?
6 What are the side effects of research chemicals?
7 What are the long term risks of these drugs?
8 What doses do I use?
9 How do I measure doses of research chemicals?
10 Can I mix X with Y?
11 Are research chemicals legal?
12 Where can I get research chemicals?
13 Has anyone ever died from taking a 'research chemical'?

Q: What are research chemicals? 1
A: "Research chemicals" literally refers to chemicals which are still being researched. Another term for them is "Experimental Chemicals" which may better communicate the unknown risks associated with ingesting them. When used to describe psychoactive drugs, it refers to new substances which haven't been thoroughly studied. Many are very new, while others may have been around for years but haven't been formally studied, used by many people, or much data accumulated about their use. Very little is known about them, and much of what is known is based only on first hand reports. Little if any research has been done on the toxicology or pharmacology of these drugs. Few, if any, human or animal studies have been done. Unlike better known drugs such as ecstasy, which has been taken by millions of people over 20+ years, or marijuana which has been used by billions of people over millennia, research chemicals are new and may only have been used by a few dozen people for a few months. The risks involved with research chemicals are far far greater than with most other drugs, since they're unknowns. It should also be pointed out that while this FAQ refers only to chemicals, the same answers apply to new or unstudied plant drugs as well. In fact, the risks of ingesting research plants are even greater, because plants contain many chemicals and the levels of different chemicals can vary greatly between different samples of the plant.

Q: Are research chemicals safe to ingest? 2
A: No! No drug use is 'safe' and using these drugs involves far greater risk than using older and better studied drugs. This is not so say that the chemicals themselves are dangerous... the risk lies in the fact that very little is known about them. There haven't been enough people using them in high enough doses for long enough periods of time for us to have an idea what the chemicals are capable of. When you're taking a new and unstudied drug, you are making yourself a human guinea pig. The drug you are taking may be perfectly safe. It may even be beneficial. On the other hand, you could take it 3 times and then suddenly find yourself being 20 years old and having Parkinson's disease. If you think this is an exaggeration, do some research on the drug MPTP, the chemical which was responsible for the DEA being given emergency scheduling powers. When you take a research chemical, you are stepping out into the unknown, and you could be the unfortunate person to discover a new drug's lethal dose. You could find yourself addicted. If you overdose and end up at the hospital, the doctors will only be able to guess at how to treat you. Some drugs, like LSD and psilocybin, have a wide therapeutic range in which there is little to no possibility of pharmacologically induced death, while other substances such as Mescaline become dangerous at only a few times their active dose. Accidental overdoses happen to everyone who works with psychoactives for long enough and overdoses of research chemicals have unknown consequences. If you aren't prepared to accept these risks, you should avoid research chemicals.

Q: This research chemical is very similar to a well known drug which is very safe. Doesn't that mean its safe too? 3
A: Not necessarily. In the case of a new drug which is very chemically similar to another well known drug, pharmacologists can try to extrapolate from the known drug, but there's no guarantees here. Consider the drug PMA: closely related to MDMA (ecstasy), but it can kill in doses only slightly over those necessary go produce psychoactive effects. Again, consider the tragic case of MPTP. If a research chemical is similar to a known drug, there's a good chance it's safety profile is similar; but there's also a very real chance it's not.

Q: Several of my friends tried this drug and they didn't have any problems, so its safe, right? 4
A: No. Idiosyncratic reactions are a large part of the risks taking psychoactive drugs. Less tested psychoactives may cause extreme or negative reactions in a small portion of users and just because a few people use a chemical recklessly without getting hurt doesn't mean that will hold true for you.

Q: I read some trip reports about this chemical I want to try, but they're all so different! What are the effects of this drug? 5
A: People react differently to different drugs. With well known drugs, enough people have done them that we have a pretty good idea what the range of common and uncommon effects are. With research chemicals, there are often many contradictory reports, and its hard to say what the typical effects are simply because not enough people have taken them for us to know what the average results are. What are often the particularly dangerous effects are those that hit a minority of users and this information is not available for research chemicals. Does 5% of the population lack an enzyme without which this drug can cause serious damage? Are people with latent heart problems particularly at risk with this new chemical? You might read all the first hand reports and then take the drug yourself and get effects exactly like you expected, or you could have an experience totally unlike anything anyone else has had. Expect the unexpected. Be prepared for both pleasant surprises and horrible shocks. Have your insurance card with you and get the number for the closest emergency room.

Q: What are the side effects of research chemicals? 6
A: Who knows? While some of the stronger, more common side effects may be discovered fairly quickly, you could always be the unlucky first person to discover a new, previously unknown side effect. Before you take any kind of new drug, you should always investigate it. Read all the available information on it, whether in books, journals, or reports people have written on their experiences. Talk to people who have done it. This kind of investigation is extremely important if you're taking some kind of research chemical! Always start with much lower doses than you think you'll need, because with any drug, there are always some people who are hypersensitive to some or all of the effects. A moderate dose for one person could be a fatal overdose for you. Be aware of what's going on with your body when first trying the drug. Mildly annoying side effects at lower doses could be indicators of potentially dangerous side effects at higher doses. Its a good idea to keep around a blood pressure and pulse monitoring device so you can check your vitals if you notice anything unusual happening. When taking research chemicals, be prepared for unexpected side effects which could vary in strength between "mildly annoying" and "drug induced fatality."

Q: What are the long term risks of these drugs? 7
A: The long term effects of research chemicals are unknown. They haven't been used by enough people for long enough to be able to tell what long term use can do. Even a single exposure to a research chemical could have long term repercussions. MPTP, the drug mentioned above, was an impurity found in the so called "designer drug" MPPP, a synthetic drug created by an underground chemist looking for a legal heroin substitute in the early 1980s. Using MPTP just once can cause damage to the brain, leading to a permanent condition resembling Parkinson's disease. If you decide to take a research chemical, you may want to avoid taking it often, and you may even want to go as far as to put a limit on your lifetime exposure to any given chemical (for example, only take it 3 times, then not take it again until many years have passed and more research has been done - if even then).

Q: What doses do I use? 8
A: With research chemicals, the dosage range may not be fully established. Some people are always going to be sensitive to any given drug, so its wise to start much lower than you think you'll need. Its better to take too little and get no effects than to take too much and discover you're hypersensitive to the drug. If necessary work up to a full dose over several tries. Give yourself time in between tries to make sure tolerance doesn't build up and throw off your numbers. Also, keep in mind that the overdose level for research chemicals hasn't been discovered. Taking large doses should be avoided unless you're willing to take the risk of being the first person to discover the lethal dose of some chemical. You should also always try to use things by the safest route possible. Taking a drug orally is the best bet. Smoking, snorting, rectal administration and injections all magnify the risks of dosage accidents. Experience reports on erowid, lycaeum, or usenet can be used only to get a sense of the order of magnitude (should the dosage be 1 gram, 1 milligram, or 10 micrograms) and from there responsible users start low and work up with new compounds. Being conservative in your dosage is healthier and more fun as a long term strategy.

Q: How do I measure doses of research chemicals? 9
A: As carefully and accurately as possible! Having a scale is virtually essential, especially for chemicals active in dosages under 100mg. Never ever measure out doses under 100mg by eye (not even using the "graph paper method" or by repeatedly dividing). If you don't have a scale, you can dissolve many chemicals in water or alcohol (always test a small sample for solubility first). Take a known weight of drug and dissolve it in a known volume of liquid (for example, 500mg in 50ml), then you can measure doses out by volume (in the example, 1ml of liquid would contain 10mg of drug). Tragic accidents, including freak-outs, trips to the emergency room, and even deaths, can be the result of mismeasuring doses. Crystalline materials vary in how 'fluffy' they are the volume of the same mass of material can vary dramatically and even with very careful eyeballing, mistakes of 10-30 milligrams are common. Measure your doses as if your life, health, and sanity depended upon your accuracy. There are few things more horrible than accidental overdoses of psychedelic drugs you don't trust.

Q: Can I mix chemical X with drug Y? 10
A: Even with well studied drugs, mixes can produce unexpected results. If you're talking about new, barely studied drugs: we don't fully understand what they do on their own, much less in combinations. Also, the more drugs you throw in the mix, the more unpredictable things get. If you choose to mix research chemicals with other drugs, always use MUCH lower doses of each drug than you would use if you were taking them separately, because there is always the risk of an unforseen dangerous interaction. Look at how closely related drugs interact, this may give you a hint of what to expect. There are no guarantees though. Of course, the risks are even greater if you mix two or more research chemicals. Never mix a drug you haven't taken before until you've gotten familiar with what the effects of the drug are on its own.

Q: Are research chemicals legal? 11
A: That depends on which chemical and where you live. If you live in a country which has 'drug analogue' laws, such as the USA, then some uncontrolled chemicals may be illegal to consume or possess. An analog (or the idiosyncratic US federal spelling "analogue") is a drug which is chemically related to an illegal drug, has similar effects, or is "represented as having" or "intended to have" similar effects. Under US laws, the drug analog laws come into play if you consume a chemical, sell it for consumption, or possess it with the intent to consume it. If you intend to use the chemical to try and kill some poison ivy plants in your back yard or to clean your toilet, then the analog laws don't apply. Also illegal would be to sell a research chemical as a look-alike drug - that is, to misrepresent it as an illegal drug. If you put some legal chemical in a pill and sell it as ecstasy, you can be charged with selling actual ecstasy - even if its a sugar pill. Unless either the analogue or look-alike laws are involved, though, most research chemicals are not strictly illegal. Some states have placed controls on chemicals which are for sale in other states, so its important to look into the laws in your area. In countries like the USA or Germany, where the government has emergency banning powers, a research chemical can be declared illegal immediately, so a drug can become illegal overnight without you knowing it. If you plan to keep around research chemicals, its up to you to keep up with changes in the law. A key concept to keep in mind is that you can be arrested, charged, and your property seized in the United States based on simply the presumption that you possess a scheduled substance. Any white powder that 'looks like a drug' seen by a cop is almost guaranteed to get you put in jail and you can have your lawyer sort out whether you were 'technically' violating any laws. Analog prosecutions are expensive and tend to be reserved to punish sales, but simple possession can lead to very awful consequences, even if a felony conviction isn't the final result.

Q: Where can I get research chemicals? 12
A: From wherever they come from. Perhaps you are a chemist and can make your own (if you have to ask how to make them, you aren't qualified). Perhaps you can order them from chemical supply companies (many of these require you provide credentials proving you are with a legitimate research institution). Perhaps your cousin Jimmy Bob's friend Gomer has some and will give you a sample. Occasionally, some of these things become commercially available to the public in some form or another (GBL was, for a while, available as an industrial solvent). Many people get research chemicals by discretely asking trusted friends. Its not a good idea to go posting around Internet drug sites asking where you can get things, for several reasons. One, this attracts attention, which could speed up making a new drug illegal. Two, discussions like this tend to get repetetive and noisy, attract spammers and scammers, and are generally considered rude. Three, most companies which sell these things are not allowed by law to sell them for human consumption as drugs: if the companies discover a product of theirs is used recreationally they may choose to stop selling it or be forced to stop selling it to avoid criminal or civil liability. And four, if you're caught with a chemical and charged for violating analogue laws, your posts could possibly end up being used as evidence against you that you intended to use the chemicals illegally. Many underground researchers find companies by searching the net, but most find chemicals through friends. Beware of those selling chemicals at parties or clubs, they are notoriously the worst quality and least likely to be accurately represented.

Q: Has anyone ever died from taking a 'research chemical'? 13
Yes. Unfortunately, its impossible to get reliable or consistent data about causes of deaths. People are fearful of reporting deaths because of potential criminal, civil, and political repurcussions. There are also bogus reports of deaths by people who want to 'send a message' and there are also people who report a death but don't provide enough details to follow up on the information. If you know of any deaths or serious injuries directly related to research chemicals or any psychedelic, please collect as many substantiating details as possible and send a note to erowid so we can research it and make sure users know about it.

Taken from here.
[ 12 October 2002: Message edited by: nickthecheese ]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I value my life..
My attitude is to let other people be the guinea pigs, if they so wish to...
Ill stick to what I know thanks...
 
Cheers for the post. Many valid and thoughtful points there.
 
Good post! I believe people need to be well aware of the risks they are taking.
Some people will learn the hard way, others, well they don't learn at all. Like when you stop playing with fire when you get burnt. ;)
 
i agree with everything you've drawn attention to here but i also wanted to highlight the fact that drugs we deem "mainstream" were once research chemicals too...
as publicity and use of these substances increases attitudes will always tend to get a bit casual. im not trying to justify people's attitudes though...
 
Amen to ^^^^^^^ that, and to this thread in general.
Treat Research Chems with respect, and you have a lot better chance of surviving intact.
-plaz out-
 
Research chemicals are potentially dangerous for all the reasons given.

MPTP (l-methyl-4-phenyl-1,2,5,6-tetrahydropyridine ) is an impurity produced as a side reaction product in the grignard synthesis of a “synthetic heroin’ called Meperidine. This is a good example of an impurity which caused devastating effects. Administration of very small amounts of MPTP triggers oxidative destruction of Dopamine producing ganglia in the basal stratum, causing almost instant Parkinson’s. Acute toxicity from 1 injection of Meperidine contaminated with MPTP usually results in a permanent inability to move.

Although commercially available Research chemicals should be relatively free from impurities, the usual net sources don’t mention the grades of the chemicals. i.e. AR, BP etc.
As these chemicals are not produced with the intention of human consumption, it is unlikely the standards of purity would be that high. [Edit: recently research chem advertised usually state between 95-99% purity]

From a site listing AMT for sale
THIS PRODUCT MAYBE POISONOUS AND IS NOT INTENDED FOR HUMAN CONSUMPTION IT SHOULD ONLY BE USED BY QUALIFIED PEOPLE FOR RESEARCH PURPOSES! KEEP AWAY FROM CHILDREN AND PETS


Some points on impurities:
  • Very small percentages maybe all that’s
    required to be toxic. Concentrations may be as low as 0.1% or less
  • Properties of many impurities from clandestine syntheses of known drugs have not been totally investigated.
  • Newly discovered impurities, in recently developed research chems, may not have been evaluated as toxins at all i.e. no basic tests done on enzymes etc.
  • Toxic effects may result from acute or chronic use, and maybe temporary or permanent. As mentioned, many chemicals can induce subtle changes in metabolism/protein synthesis which can take years to develop into a physical disease.

Just to keep things in perspective, many of these chemicals (and impurities) MAY turn out to be far less harmful than MDMA and its many possible impurities. Excluding perhaps psilocybin, psilocin and DMT, the major difference with MDMA compared to the currently researched Tryptamines, is we know lots more about it - more human research has been done with MDMA.

In regards to both acute and chronic toxicity; if MDMA was invented today and submitted for trial, it would never even reach phase 2. Being toxic in several ways, MDMA would be cast out quickly without getting much beyond cells tests - the test tube part of phase 1.

Tryptamines ala Tihkal, will undoubtedly help unlock secrets of neural communication. For many of these chems, their time will come with future improvements to radio labeling and emission topography techniques. While these chems remain available to scientists without restriction, it makes sense to think more researchers will work with them. In this respect I see the aims of research could well be hampered by the good intentions of Harm Minimisation.

With today’s resources, these chemicals are picked up by the experimenting public as soon as they appear on catalogue. I therefore see it as vitally important that posters should not feel reluctant or intimidated to post trip reports for fear of flaming. People need to read of these encounters. The impact is almost always positive, particularly with the replies received, such as in the referred thread.

Yet as more trip report stories are told, closer comes the time when these compounds will be classified. The legal “window” of future Research chems could be very short indeed, and the red tape necessary for research will prohibit some and limit others from working with them :(

Let’s continue to echo these warnings, particularly in the wake of 2C-T-7. If you are intent on being a psychedelic researcher who self administers, then at least do as Shulgin does/did, and work up gradually from small doses. Accept there can be individual differences in responses. Tread carefully, and always have a straight co-pilot with you.

Anyone notice AMT was referred to as sextacy in the (Other Drugs) thread.

And a quick comment on your sextacy experience...
Was this just a term used among this poster’s peers? The 2 words came up with nothing on Google. “Sextacy” is looking at being very confusing slang. What next will be passed under this titled?

Sextacy- The New Rave Drug?
 
Last edited:
I feel that the term ' research chemical' does seem at times to stand for a chemical which is new & therefore give the impression of it possibly being better...this is a very risky assumption to make! As I think nickthecheese is stating as one of his words of warnings...

Very good thread:)

Be safe, be informed 1st!
 
I fully agree with the sentiments in this thread, yet have problems with convincing people who have already tried research chemicals, to limit their investigations, as they say "well considering i've already tried one research chemical and i don't know what the side effects are, but i feel fine, ergo i might as well try them all."
Stupido!
 
^ Very interesting point of view... I personally hadn't considered that myself.

BigTrancer :)
 
I fully agree with Tabernacle on this.
Its seems that RC's have become the new pokemon! Gotta Have them all!

I believe it has alot to do with ppl becoming bored with the chems that are readily available to them also wanting to add to their personal repertoire of RC's taken.

As long as they become more and more popular this will never change, but I do hope that everyone is as lucky as I have been, in having the luxury of very knowledgeable friends to consult with before trying something new.
There is plenty of reading material on erowid for ppl wanting to experiment, but I do find a personal opinion from someone you know and trust is sometimes your best advice.

:)
 
This thread has been an interesting read.

One thing I was wondering is:

How close are some of the above chemicals being declassified as research chemicals and is there a source of official information around containing some of the outcomes of research for these chemicals and the percieved side effects they have.

I ask this I'm wary of the effects something like one of the 2C-x's have, yet there is so much information out there (bluelight, erowid, trip reports etc, etc). 2C-I for instance, I'm not saying that it's safe, but I made the decision to try it after reading about it, and reading other peoples experiences, as I felt that I could ensure relative safety if I started with a small dose (that was all that was needed) and was in a comfortable environment with access to food/water/car for sleeping etc etc.

Yet then, the other day I was reading a thread where one was describing 2C-P (Will try to find link) which from what I could gather was pretty much brand new, yet instantly everyone jumped on asking for availability, dosage etc etc. I see this as a kind of dangerous mentality.

Now, mayve I'm thinking about this in the wrong way, but somethign which has been researched, used and abused for x amount of years such as 2C-I would have to be a better choice than rushing out and finding 2C-P, would it not?

Ok, all that is hardly making sense to me now!
 
Hehe @ "declassified as research chemicals"... I think the only way these stop being "research chemicals" is when they become known as "new designer drugs" and later "illicit drugs". The so-called research that these chemicals are used for is personal psychoactive research carried out in a more-or-less rigorous fashion by the end user, AFAIK.

BigTrancer :)
 
when does an RC gradute to being considered a real drug? 2c-b and t2 have been around for 30 years and they have both been for sale over the counter in more than one country. Both have been used in therapy sessions by real doctors and are still considered research, yet we have ten new drugs for medical purposes released everyday to the public with unknown long term side effects.
 
Top