2C-x-NBOMe...not psychedelic?

[phantomcosmonaut]

So I always assumed 25x drugs to be psychedelic. But it was pointed out to me that the structure is not that of a psychedelic and being a full agonist of serotonin receptors also is not characteristic of a psychedelic. I have done 25C and 25I once each and its really the most different psychedelic drug I've tried. Now that its brought up to me like this, the experience itself doesn't seem very psychedelic either. Obviously it is in certain ways but not in typical psychedelic ways. Here is my source: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=ZJtdZUy1LYE] at about 22 minutes into the video he begins discussing it. I guess it could be a matter of opinion, considering the effects are "psychedelic", but is it [I/]really a psychedelic??? I would think not but maybe there is something I am missing.

 

[sekio]

But it was pointed out to me that the structure is not that of a psychedelic and being a full agonist of serotonin receptors also is not characteristic of a psychedelic

One common definition of 'psychedelic' is anything that acts as a 5ht2a receptor agonist, which 25x is most definitely... and the structure is very closely related to 2c-X, which are widely considered to be psychedelics, too.

The general consensus is that 25x are much less immersive and 'complex' than drugs with a less selective, broader spectrum of action.

 

[phantomcosmonaut]

So I guess since classification can differ like that, then there is no real answer. What do you think though?

 

[.:Holy::Toast:.]

The term psychedelic has nothing to do with structure or which receptors it binds too or with how high of a binding efficacy.
It simply refers to the effects produced.
Ketamine doesn't act on serotonin receptors yet it is considered a psychedelic.
Deliriants such as datura can also be classified as psychedelic

 

[ebola?]

Sure. They induce signature "psychedelic thoughts" for me, but I would also say that dissociatives and cannabinoids share this property.

ebola

 

[mutterfuter]

Many people thnk that 25x is shallow... I think it's situational. I get completely different effects depending if I'm home listenng to musi, at a show, or in nature. It is always psychedelic, though.

 

[Incunabula]

The term psychedelic has nothing to do with structure or which receptors it binds too or with how high of a binding efficacy.
It simply refers to the effects produced.
Ketamine doesn't act on serotonin receptors yet it is considered a psychedelic.
Deliriants such as datura can also be classified as psychedelic

I know this is just semantics, but I don't think ketamine is considered a psychedelic, but only a dissociative rather. Datura is just considered a deliriant also, not a psychedelic. They are all hallucinogens though, so maybe that was what you were thinking of.

 

[lovepsychadelics]

25B Nbome at a 550 ug's I'd call psychedelic. CEV's and open eyed morphing of form, color bleeding typical PEA type visuals vs tryptamine. 25c Nbome has more of a euphoric feel with CEV's and mostly mild color distortion OEV's, however taken with another psychedelic substance the visuals can be more overwhelming/intense than either substance alone. I don't really recommend this as it can be an ordeal physically. 25 i is almost in between the two.

Depending on what your expecting to experience 25c Nbome is almost a party drug vs a truly deep psychedelic experience while 25B is in it's own rights a powerful psychedelic. Then you have 25D, 25G etc...

 

[.:Holy::Toast:.]

I know this is just semantics, but I don't think ketamine is considered a psychedelic, but only a dissociative rather. Datura is just considered a deliriant also, not a psychedelic. They are all hallucinogens though, so maybe that was what you were thinking of.

Yes actually that is what I was thinking of thanks haha

 

[lovepsychadelics]

You could always take a dissociative with a psychedelic . I will pass on most deliriant substances though! Hate to think what would happened if you combined a deliriant with anything.

 

[phantomcosmonaut]

Lets not forget there is a difference between being a psychedelic and being psychedelic. I would have to agree that drugs like ketamine, marijuana, or MDMA are psychedelic in effect, but not actual psychedelics obviously. By this rule I would say 25x is psychedelic but not a psychedelic, same as the aforementioned drugs.

 

[atara]

My experiences with 25C-NBOMe and 25I-NBOMe were decidedly psychedelic. I'm actually not even sure how this question could be posed -- the body-feeling is like other psychedelics, the thought-patterns are like other psychedelics, and sure they aren't very deep, but this applies equally to 2C-C, 5-MeO-MiPT, 4-HO-DiPT, proscaline, and even, arguably, MDA. And it's not just me:

http://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=99188

http://www.erowid.org/experiences/exp.php?ID=99956

Among the psychedelic effects of the NBOMes, they're conditionally euphoric, they [can] promote selfless behavior and thinking, they induce disturbances in the gut (kind of an odd telltale, but a consistent one), they produce distortion of bodily sensation, and allow people to interpret their perceptions through a lens of, with apologies to Heidegger, being-in-the-world[1]. The classical dissociatives are universally physically anaesthetic and usually anxiolytic, which the NBOMes are not, and the cannabinoids are generally sedating and analgesic, not to mention appetite stimulants that produce hypotension and cause anxiety in sensitive individuals, and again the NBOMes are not. They share not only microscopic but perceptual effects far more strongly with other psychedelics than with dissociatives or cannabinoids; 25C in particular has a sort of entactogenic body high, but it doesn't go farther than that [as an entactogen].

I don't know what you would call them, if not psychedelics. You might argue from a lack of phenomenological "depth" that the NBOMes are not entheogens, but that's another can of worms.

[1]: See The Lensless Lens, Mumon-kan, c. 1228

 

[Solipsis]

It's complex. While I do feel that 25D was able to give me a quite pure feeling of serenity, a quality that must be duly noted... I also generally feel that there can potentially be a reason for appreciation when either (and/or)
- the pharmacological profile of one compound as a pure drug is rich or promiscuous in a certain way, then balanced and versatile in action seen in the expressed effects... or
- a drug is of a natural origin and composed of various different compound acting together and modulating or attenuating each other, often orchestrated beautifully and harmoniously.

So a selective quality or sensation can be useful, you can use a psychedelic very precisely as a tool to try to achieve, provide or add certain effects to an amalgamate.

Also it has got to do a lot with expectations and how broad, complete, fulfilled you want a drug to act considering it's category. It's very hard to expect a substantial answer if the question is not properly defined. What is a psychedelic to you?

 

[Psychonautical]

Some people say, Black Widow venom is psychedelic.
I strongly stand by, the affirmation that, the 25* Series is poison in it's own right.

Sure it maps, the pathways. But you don't know if it leaves the path ways un-nuked. In the end.
Especially after repetitive use.

They are trying to determine the start and finish of the psychedelic effect using full receptor agonists.

 

[atara]

Here is my source: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=ZJtdZUy1LYE] at about 22 minutes into the video he begins discussing it. I guess it could be a matter of opinion, considering the effects are "psychedelic", but is it [I/]really a psychedelic??? I would think not but maybe there is something I am missing.

Oh, okay, I watched the video. You're looking at David Nichols, a prominent psychedelics researcher. When he says 25I-NBOMe is "not psychedelic", he's talking about drug discrimination, which is a way of asking a rat if a drug gave them the same sort of effects as another drug. Drug discrimination is actually very important in testing and it's the gold standard of a lot of pharmaceutical research.

Anywho, what "not psychedelic" means to someone who runs drug discrimination tests is that it doesn't trick the rat into thinking it was something else. Usually you will measure the compound against a standard, for instance, 6-APB fully substitutes for MDMA (rats think they're the same thing), so we call it an entactogen. The standard used for psychedelic drug discrimination is either LSD or DOI, depending on the person running the test, so what this all really means is that 25I-NBOMe doesn't substitute for either DOI or LSD in lab animals.

Does that mean it's not psychedelic in humans? Obviously not! ;p

One more thing: you're saying to yourself "Why didn't Nichols consider my trip report when he said it wasn't psychedelic?" Well, this talk is from 2010, which is actually before the NBOMe compounds appeared on the research chemical market. So at that point, there really wasn't much reason to believe that they would be psychedelic. The only animals which had ever tried them were rats, and the rats didn't think they felt a whole lot like DOI. Of course, some people in Russia thought it was worth a try, lo and behold...

tl;dr: the Nichols video doesn't take any human effects into account, because no humans had tried it at the time he gave the talk.

 

[Jesusgreen]

being a full agonist of serotonin receptors also is not characteristic of a psychedelic.

Pretty much the way we class something as a psychedelic these days is being a serotonin (5-HT - or more specifically 5-HT2A) receptor agonist. The fact that most are partial agonists and some NBOMes are full agonists would suggest they're *more* psychedelic going by that logic, rather than not psychedelics.

The NBOMe series are definitely psychedelics by every definition available.

atara gave a good explanation above of why Nichols said what he said in that video.

The real argument comes into play for say things like weed and dissociatives - they're technically "psychedelic" in the true meaning of the term, "mind manifesting" - but they're not 5-HT2A agonists like what we typically class as psychedelics.

 

[ebola?]

and allow people to interpret their perceptions through a lens of, with apologies to Heidegger, being-in-the-world[1].

Succinctly put, though I think there are alternate ways to characterize this cognitive shift, particularly with milder psychedelic effects. For me, psychedelic cognition involves a shift in one's lens of awareness, with causo-temporal reasoning telescoping forward and backward in time receding and awareness of the usually implicit conditions structuring the present (and in turn, the background of the eternal) rising to prominence. For me, the pattern of thought is 'Hegelian': a conceptual opposition appears before me, its opposition is superseded by a more widely encompassing concept, but one that presents additional conceptual tensions...through multiple iterations, a wider schematic of the organism-environment interaction as a whole emerges...

ebola