Speaking to a friend the other day who's studying chem and he suggested the possibility of Masking Agents to trick E testers. To any chem or med students out there A/ do masking agents exist B/ would they fit in pills C/ Boy am I PARANOID!
"You can tell a lot about a man by the way he eats his jellybeans" [Ronald Reagan]
Moving you over to drug discussion...
I think if you grab some household items you might find that some of them react to the ez-testers... A friend told me sugar goes blank, however I've never bothered to test it so can't say...
As for whether the substances which do test black can be used as a filler is beyond me... So on that note I'll get outta the thread and let someone who knows inform us all...
and this is why u shld use BOTH E and E2.
There are other chemicals which do give a black reaction or an ecstasy like reaction when tested. As ghost said this is why the E1 and the E2 should be used in combination with each other as it is virtually impossible to fool both testers. With two reagents available why would you risk not using them both in combination?
www.enlighten-hr.org - Enlighten Harm Reduction.
there was a batch in Perth recently which fooled E2. So these would not have likely to fool E1? I'd like to know the chemistry behind this if it's available. Anyone?
Basically these testers are strong acids. Anything that turns black under acid should give you a black test result - this is why you should never test samples on paper or cardboard, because they will turn black instantly masking the result you're trying to see. Perhaps a sample including something as benign as starch would even give a false positive for MDxx compounds.
Load universe into cannon. Aim at brain. Shoot.
so it's the same for both testers yeah?
no offence big trancer but wtf?
lemme guess, u aint no chem student?
yeh ive always bein a bit concerned how much people, myself included rely on the testers when they can be so easily tricked. all u need is a smart manufacturer to work out what to use to trick the tester, and we all be screwed. but luckily, so far not too many appear to know how.
i'll try and find something about colour tests and get back to u guys...
[This message has been edited by dj ezidick (edited 17 May 2001).]
Many things will fool it in regards to it going black;
BUT the familiar transition of dark purple through to black is what to look out for.
Weird blacks; red first, gases, yellows (potassium iodide), black so fast u couldnt see it, etc, r things to look out for.
But it needs a trained eye. I'd use both testers, internet reports and maybe a scraping for taste test!
SirLSD: You're right, I haven't done chemistry since 2nd year uni. After 3 years of inorganic, organic and physical chemistry I couldn't stand it any more. So what? I do know for a fact that paper turns black under Marquis reagent. What's your problem with my post?
"Anything that turns black under acid should give you a black test result" this is a very oversimplified statement. the testers arent simple marquis reagent are they?
"Perhaps a sample including something as benign as starch would even give a false positive for MDxx compounds" id say most pills would contain starch anyway. everytime we manufactured tablets in our labs we added 5-20%of starch to the excipient mix. its an excellent binding agent that also acts as a disintergrant in the presence of water. therefore it makes good quality tablets and allows fast disintergration in the stomach.
posted 24 January 2001 09:04:32 AM
Sometimes pills & tablets get sprayed with a weak solution of
MDMA after being pressed, especially now with the advent of
these "miracle" EZ-Testers.
Tablets that have been sprayed are often "powdery" on the
outside and can have a very strong bitter or spicy (peppery or aniseed)
This often leads people to assume that the bitterness they taste
on their tongue is an MDMA-like substance, and expect a
fabulous experience to follow.
Manufacturers are not stupid and most have realized that it is
possible to pack as much filler and crap into the middle of the pill,
and "top up" the outside & edges with substances containing
enough MDMA to produce a "blue to black" response on the
Please be careful on how much you rely on these testers.
Me personally? I ask what I'm getting and whether it's been
tested. If they guarantee a test result, I chop a pill in half and
scrape from two opposite edges and also from the middle, and do
three separate tests myself in front of the seller. If it's no good, I
won't buy it.
Why should we be risking our health and wasting our money on
crummy substances from selfish sellers? Do you really think you
have the right to bitch about a bad night on a bunk pill if you
bought it at 9pm inside a club? No one should be complaining
about a bad night if they weren't a little more vigilant and sensible
in the first place....
Once again, I just want to ask everyone to please be careful.
Remember the big picture, and make the decisions you need to,
based upon what you think is right for you in the long run.
THNX HEAPS FOOD FOR THOUGHT!
definitely have to re-educate self on testing!
I think I have an example of this.
It is supposedly a "white pacman". It is clean white in colour, approx 7mm wide, 6mm high VERY odd shape with strange outward dome both sides while only approx 2mm or less makes up the firm, straight "edge" of the pill. Ie. it's almost completely round with no straight edges. Poor press, mostly indistinguishable "logo". Very chalky and brittle in texture. No split on reverse - it's a bit hard to tell which is the "reverse" and which is the "logo". Tests BLACK straight away on E2 (tested alongside a yonex, very similar reaction) and deep purple on EZ-Test. From the tester this appears to be a strong pill. Some bubbles apparent in the E2 test as is sometimes the case with strong or concentrated bickys.
Now the wierd bit - user reports - NOTHING. Could this be the 1st case of a dodgy local repress with contents designed to fool the tester?? If so, we know MDMA is lacking, but what's been added in it's place??? Those who did eat (fools) said it did nothing but thankfully did not drop any known MDMA bickys afterwards.
PS. I posted this msg in the social forum cos I thought drug discussion was still up the creek. any info from anyone who's seen these or heard about them is much appreciated. cheers
did you test from just the outside, or also the inside of the pill?
there's always been one way to "fool" the tests; put in less than 1 mg of MDxx in each pill. this is less than your body can detect, but is plenty for the tester.
just a reminder: the testers have never been described as "foolproof" and their limitations have always been widely known. there will always be pill that slip between the gaps of their effectiveness.
dont like it? go buy a gas chromatograph....
JB: I tested from both the inside AND outside of the pill. it was such a poor quality press, I knew something was fishy so thats why I was thorough.
I think there was probably trace amounts of MDxx to influence the tester's reaction, but not enough to be of any recreational use. I recently heard that someone ate 5 at once and felt *MILD* effects of MDMA. Yes I know that's very stupid but I don't know the person, and told everyone I knew to steer clear if they came in contact with the same pill.
BTW i know it's a long time between posts in this thread, but I found this while looking for something else.. cheers!!
True, Luko. There have been instances of pills quantitatively lab tested in Europe that have showed active ingredients equal to 1mg MDMA. I don't know whether this is enough to influence a tester, but it shows that people are trying. I'm not sure how often this happens, though from looking at Eve&Rave, there's only 1 or 2 batches (containing MDMA) that have below 40mg content, plenty come in around the 40-60mg mark, then the next level up is around 80-95mg, after that you hit the super bickies 100-130+mg. Otherwise people don't usually bother, if they're gonna make a speedbomb, they'll chuck everything but MDMA in.
Load universe into cannon. Aim at brain. Shoot.
We wait patiently for the day when we all carry around tiny portable GC/MS (Gas Chromatograph/Mass Spectrometers) and these conversations about the dodgy(dangerous) quality of pills can cease..
In the meantime, I've been waiting for three weeks to speak to a friend(?) of mine here in sydney who said he'd tested pills at the Sydney Uni, legally mind, assuming the whole time he meant with a GCMS.. he gave me 'results' and I thought they were gospel... So I gave him some samples of B/B's and Clovers and a really weird pill with MJ stamped on it. (micheal jordan?). I got some really impressive looking documents back which contained very specific measurements of what was 'in the pills'. (documents which he chose to keep after a while)
SINCE this however, I posted one of the B/B 'findings' on a pill report, and JOHNBOY who contacted me, seems to think it is most certianly NOT legal and was interested in getting hold of some of the test stuff that this guy got me. I saw this guy again at Rush Hour for the first time on the weekend and he didnt seem very interested in helping me. Im continuing to try and fugure out whats the deal but im guessing hes 'shitting out his mouth'. My apologies to those who did read that info I put on the 'board'. and to John'o. What I cannot figure out is, why go to the trouble that he did if it was only to scam THREE pills. Wish i'd kept the stuff he gave me or at least copied it..
The thing that made me believe him was that there a numerous web pages for the U.S. that give you an address to send your pills to (*particularly dud ones*) for them to test and post the results.. you DO NOT get your PILL back but you do see that they did test it and it is NOT illegal and you cant be charged.. I assumed this was also the case in AUST.
Does ANYONE KNOW if it is at all possible to use some facility's GCMS for this purpose?
(face it: if someone told you they could do it at a UNI, wouldn't you believe them?)
DONT BE DUPED.
*NOT HAPPY* =K9=
Didn't JB mention getting some thin layer chromatography plates or something of the like?
GCMS would be an idea setup, although expensive. I'm sure our UNI labs would have such things tho
K9 - What sort of results did he give you? Did they seem legit? Or did they not match the personal trip reports ppl gave you?
Hrmm dodgy chemists in clubs.. oh it just gets better :P~~
ha ha! love that last line.. i like your work ruski...
No! they *looked TOTALLY believable*.. so much so that I'm still only speculating it was dodge... cos I was also previously completely convinced that it was legal and fine...
I want to see the stuff he showed me again.
There's like *gotta* be SOME independant body with the use of a GS/MS that could undertake to do this.. I suppose the Uni sounded like as good a place as any..
The amount of red tape required for you to legally use a department's analytical gear for such purposes, is considerable. The sample must come from the police, who have to issue permits for the collection and the passing on of the sample.
The institution/ company will also require a permit, covering the dates etc. that the substance will be present on site. Any transport of the samples to your testing area will require more permits and there will probably be some conditions about how the sample is to be destroyed etc. or returned!
Believe it or not a Uni can get permits to make things, easier than they can for collecting and testing samples of illicit substances.
In short - it would probably be way too much trouble for you to do it legally. Especially if your intent was to test for amounts of MDMA in your sample.
JB can probably advise more on this.
Also remember that ANY schedulled drugs sent through the mail, violate Australian federal laws. We are not the US, and our postal service apparently operates differently, so DanceSafe won't be setting up a local chapter for lab testing just yet.
Things are moving foward though. Unless testing is absolutely banned, the future looks rather bright - better things are on the way.
Thin Layer Chromatography (TLC) techniques I've used in the lab, are fiddly and require some time to "develop". The present E1&2 kits by comparison would definitely be easier to use in the field, although refinment of 2D TLC may be well beyond my knowledge of it. If practical, TLC would certainly be a more conclusive assessment of contents.
Problem is, the present political climate means any company intending to produce TLC kits would not (I imagine) wish to invest too much in research, design or production, as they could be left with an export only market or worse!
As law type decisions are made that often reflect media portrayal of an issue, if we suddenly had groups like Enlighten using "foolproof" techniques, the media would certainly highlight that the government was "cononding" use by allowing testing with sophisticated equipment.
You could bet there would be a panic reaction by officials.
Strange as it may seem, "potentially fallible tests" keep media focus on that issue more than the condoning aspect. It seems it is still too tricky a subject for most politicians to tackle.
It's the next generation of politicians - todays students of social engineering who are or have been ravers, that will perhaps make the biggest changes.