-
MDMA &
Empathogenic
Drugs
Welcome Guest! -
MDMA Moderators:
Erowid chart about desired effects
- Thread starter naivaklam
- Start date
No it?s a comparison of desired effects to undesired effects at a given dose, ie a slope of increasing to diminishing returns.
I believe the % of MDMA alone is the percentage of pills tests that tested for only MDMA.
This is pretty cool but also incredibly subjective given the fact that ?desired effects? in and of itself is subjective. The other consideration is the ratio of R to S isomers in the mixture which no one can account for but can pretty drastically impact the effects even though both will show as ?pure? MDMA
I believe the % of MDMA alone is the percentage of pills tests that tested for only MDMA.
This is pretty cool but also incredibly subjective given the fact that ?desired effects? in and of itself is subjective. The other consideration is the ratio of R to S isomers in the mixture which no one can account for but can pretty drastically impact the effects even though both will show as ?pure? MDMA
^Agreed, 120-130 is ideal, plus a lil booster of course 
With that said, I think the above chart is good still and would agree with it for the most part.
I saw this in a thread on Reddit with people then claiming this is bullshit because the desirable effects don't completely drop off which I would agree with.
I also find it interesting how there is a slight dip in the adverse effects as the dosage increases with 41-60mg being lower than 0-20, and the adverse effects don't really pick up until the 121-140mg range. This I fully agree with.
One more thing, it's research like this that further solidifies my theory that early 90's MDMA was of a different caliber and likely had an impurity which raised its potency because typical doses were in the 35-75mg range. I saw supposed "good presses" from the mid 90's with 20-30mg MDA in them with a break line! A lot of the doves people broke in half were 100-120mg. Pure MDMA does not do shit in the dosages people were reportedly taking during that period.
MDMA is mysterious..
-GC
With that said, I think the above chart is good still and would agree with it for the most part.
I saw this in a thread on Reddit with people then claiming this is bullshit because the desirable effects don't completely drop off which I would agree with.
I also find it interesting how there is a slight dip in the adverse effects as the dosage increases with 41-60mg being lower than 0-20, and the adverse effects don't really pick up until the 121-140mg range. This I fully agree with.
One more thing, it's research like this that further solidifies my theory that early 90's MDMA was of a different caliber and likely had an impurity which raised its potency because typical doses were in the 35-75mg range. I saw supposed "good presses" from the mid 90's with 20-30mg MDA in them with a break line! A lot of the doves people broke in half were 100-120mg. Pure MDMA does not do shit in the dosages people were reportedly taking during that period.
MDMA is mysterious..
-GC
^That or they were marketed as 120mg and were actually dosed at 160, 180, 200, etc. Wouldnt know without a first hand mass spec test.
I ran an underground UGL lab for AAS back in the day and we overdosed products a lot to get a good reputation. Much less of an issue when talking about gear though than substances like this which could be deadly from relatively small dosage changes based on the person.
Ideal dose for me is in the 160-180mg range but I?m also a larger guy and like a pretty hard roll although I havent noticed any difference in quantifiable side effects as compared to 120-140mg
I ran an underground UGL lab for AAS back in the day and we overdosed products a lot to get a good reputation. Much less of an issue when talking about gear though than substances like this which could be deadly from relatively small dosage changes based on the person.
Ideal dose for me is in the 160-180mg range but I?m also a larger guy and like a pretty hard roll although I havent noticed any difference in quantifiable side effects as compared to 120-140mg
^^No those numbers come from lab analysis done on pills in the mid 90's. There was no dosage advertising back then like now. I'd be willing to bet most people didn't even know the proper dosage of MDMA, just that "half a dove had you flying for 4-6."
The crazy thing is Doves were like 125mg Max based on lab analysis. So the question remains, how was the MDMA more potent mg/mg? There's a few theories I'm sure but my money's on DMMDA. But that's for another conversation.
-GC
The crazy thing is Doves were like 125mg Max based on lab analysis. So the question remains, how was the MDMA more potent mg/mg? There's a few theories I'm sure but my money's on DMMDA. But that's for another conversation.
-GC
Hilopsilo
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2016
- Messages
- 606
For a lot of people 125mg is more than enough, thats more than I've ever taken ever and I've probably rolled ~40 times. Same dose a lot of people I know take 100mg and have been doing it as long as I have. 125mg would have me my on my ass. I have some friends who take 150-200mg though. These are also people who've taken large doses in the past that sorta made it so they need to take higher doses permanently, that seems like a common issue. But at the same time, I have a friend who foolishly did 1000mg over the course of a night, didn't roll for a year, and now gets wrecked off of just 100mg all over again, lucky for him.
Another thought is, of everyone rolling in the 90's, I'd bet the average amount of times any of them had rolled in total is less than it is now. Herd tolerance was probably much lower than it is now that we've got people who've been rolling for 20+ years.
How much do you guys weigh? I?ve got lab tested MDMA as well but the lowest Ive gone is 140mg with 180mg being the max. Even 140mg had me rolling pretty hard with 180mg blasting me in the face but I couldnt see under 140mg getting me to whered I wouldwant to be. Im bigger at ~220lbs lean but now that I think about it my girlfriend took 140mg last time being only the 2nd roll in her life (9 months since the first) and it was intense but still not too much
psy997
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2012
- Messages
- 2,822
Weights not a big factor. You're probably taking shitty MDMA, it's everywhere.
Really? Did you miss the part about lab tested and other stuff which is snipped, but the MDMA was apparently not shitty. - Tranced
Last edited by a moderator:
^^^Lab tests mean little these days as it's apparent two batches of lab tested product can be vastly different.
Snipped question about above post - Tranced
Your higher dosage is likely due to your weight. Dosages do vary wildly for certain individuals from time to time. For instance, I have two brothers. One can roll just fine on a normal 120mg dose. The other has zero tolerance and needs 180-200mg at least for an initial dose. He's always been like this.
He also has a high natural tolerance to psychedelics as well. 80mg of highly pure DMT that would freak me out doesn't do much for him.
Everyone's different.
-GC
Snipped question about above post - Tranced
Your higher dosage is likely due to your weight. Dosages do vary wildly for certain individuals from time to time. For instance, I have two brothers. One can roll just fine on a normal 120mg dose. The other has zero tolerance and needs 180-200mg at least for an initial dose. He's always been like this.
He also has a high natural tolerance to psychedelics as well. 80mg of highly pure DMT that would freak me out doesn't do much for him.
Everyone's different.
-GC
Last edited by a moderator:
Snip
Either way you?re right, body chemistry in general can vary drastically between people because of metabolism, endogenous chemical levels, etc. within the 180mg or less range it?s probably just individual and also based on how hard people like things to hit them.
My ex girlfriend is a good example and had a ridiculous natural tolerance to psychedelics. Took her almost 400ug to trip even a little bit when 300 of the same blotters would have me fucked the hell up.
Last edited by a moderator: