• Neuroscience & Pharmacology Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Recent Journal Articles Chemistry Mega-Thread
    FREE Chemistry Databases! Self-Education Guide

  • N&PD Moderators: Skorpio

PEA-NBOMe

have you actually empirically verified the identity of your presumed PEA-NBOMe? Or is this based on a "reliable vendor"?
 
I synthesised it myself (am I allowed to say this?) so yes - I'm sure of the identity if the compound.
 
How did I synthesise it or how am i sure? I can't answer either one of those questions without braking bluelight rules.
 
LULZ this compound was listed on amazon.com via liftmode.com not more than a week ago. I believe the seller took it down now...(this okay info to posts, mods? its legal and was on amazon for jebus's sake)

I believe its the active chemical in a preworkout called craze, and i've taken that a few times. If its the same chem, its active in mg amounts, and is a stimulant, quite a cool benign one at that.

http://hightowerpharmacology.blogspot.com/2012_04_01_archive.html

^That has about the only valid info i've really seen about it.

From hightowerpharmacology(pretty cool blog BTW) - "Extensive research with alpha-methylated derivatives of this compound (See: Benzphetamine, N-Benzylamphetamine) indicate that the main metabolite of N-Benzyl-2-PEA will be PEA. Similar to the compound previously discussed, the N-benzyl substituent will likely enjoy a longer half life than regular PEA. It should offer more CNS penetration due to the non-polarity of the benzyl moiety. The main difference between PEA and its N-benzyl derivative is that the latter may produce a local anesthetic effect relating to sodium channel inhibition. It may also possess weak sigma receptor proclivity in addition to theoretical 5-HT(2A) agonism.

In summary, these compounds may indeed be superior pharmacological derivatives of phenylethylamine, although vastly inferior to alpha-substituted analogues. N-benzyl-2-PEA is a constituent of the Erythropalum scandens species, and so is likely DSHEA compliant (1). Unfortuantely, no animal or human study exists, and the potential for negative health effects, although unlikely, are not excluded."

It coming from Erythropalum scandens is as likely as DMAA coming from geranium oil ,though haha....

Anon0631 said:
How did I synthesise it or how am i sure? I can't answer either one of those questions without braking bluelight rules.
Click to expand...

Does it numb your mouth?

:)
 
I haven't put it in my mouth. It doesn't numb my nose as far as I can tell. It does smell like cocaine oddly.

lenses said:
LULZ this compound was listed on amazon.com via liftmode.com not more than a week ago. I believe the seller took it down now...(this okay info to posts, mods? its legal and was on amazon for jebus's sake)
Click to expand...

The pre-workout supplement which you saw on amazon is PEA. The compound discussed in the link you supplied is n,benzyl-PEA. The compound this thread is about is n,2-methoxy-benzyl-PEA.

As far as I can tell, it doesn't exist in any literature and hasn't been made before.

UPDATE: 4mg intranasal spread over two 2mg doses 30 minutes apart from each other. Still plus one territory. I don't really know how to classify this. It's certainly nothing like speed but its not exactly like a psychedelic either. I'm still not entirely convinced its not a placebo.

Onwards and upwards.
 
Last edited:
I wish you had tried PEA to compare :)
Hold on... if you synthed this yourself you probably did, right? Have you noticed the very transient effects PEA can bring?

Are the effects of the NBOMe analogue short-lived?
 
I think it's perfectly allowed to say how you verified the identity of the material. (reageent-color test or spectroscopy) Don't need to post any synthesis routes.
 
The synthesis route is so simple, it could only possibly be PEA-NBOMe or unreacted PEA. Possibly with traces of a reagent or two.

I have tried PEA. I didn't get any effect from either oral ROA or vaped freebase.

The effects of PEA-NBOMe last about 4 hours.
 
Last edited:
So: you haven't verified it at all. "simple synthesis" or not...

I suppose the fact you are seeing effects at all is a sign though? It would be good to get further clarification on the nature of its effects.
 
Like most kitchen chemists, I don't have access to NMR, etc. Reagent tests won't prove anything because nobody has tested the substance before. What colour should marquis show? Who the fuck knows!

I'm sure it is PEA-NBOMe because of simple reductive logic. If it isn't one thing, it has to be the other. It looks and smells very different to PEA (I'm aware that this alone means very little) and shows effects in the low milligram range. PEA for me is inactive at a hundred times these dosages.

I know there are people out there with access to superior equipment and techniques but my reason for knowing the identity of the compound is a hell of a lot more solid than the usual 'trusted vendor' nonsense. So unless someone wants to lend me their spectroscope, this will have to do.

I can't really supply further clarification of the effects as I'm still in a fuzzy plus one dosage range. I will take a couple of weeks tolerance break before trialling 8mg intranasal. If that doesn't supply a categorisable experience, I'm likely to stop there.

By the way, it would be very interesting to try the 3,4-methelinedioxy analogue of this. Unfortunately I feel that might require greater knowledge and equipment to produce than I possess.
 
Last edited:
Look for the 'ghetto TLC thread' in ADD, it would probably the most realistic chromatography method for kitchen chemists.
 
Out of interest, if I were to send a sample off for analysis, what would be a more useful? NMR or GC/MS? The aim would be to verify the identity if the compound (given that there wouldn't be an existent reference sample) and get a figure for the percentage purity.
 
I was under the impression that some sort of chromotography was needed for purity analysis? Also is MS any use without a reference sample?
 
Last edited:
NMR can integrate the relative areas of the shift peaks of varuious molecules relative to an internal standard. Also, for an MS match you generally only need a published spectrum, bur a reference compound never hurts.
 
With a little bit of logic and somewhat of an idea what you're feeding into the MS, you can make predictions whether or not the spectrum would be a possible match for your chemical by looking at the masses of the fragments. So no, you don't *really* need it, but it certainly helps. Or you could compare it against a similar compound, like one of the NBOMes.

At the very least you're likely to get the molecular weight of the compound just by looking for the M+ peak.

You can do the same with NMR too, looking at the chemical shifts.
 
Ah. So GC/MS will tell you that x% of the sample has a molecular weight of y? So if I know that PEA-NBOMe has a molecular mass of 240.3202, I can find out whether it exists in the sample and at what purity?
 
Pretty much - assuming you can use a little bit of logic. Of course, GC/MS will only measure volatile components, but that can be corrected for too.

As a rule of thumb, if you work with your analytical chemists by informing them of what you'd expect to see based upon your synthetic conditions, rather than givving them a mystery white powwder and saying "Guess", you will end up with better results every time.

For more information on GC-MS I suggest you check out websites like this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top