Zeta:
Thanks for that thorough and enlightening post, Zeta.

Really fascinating and thought-provoking.
I'm happy that you found it to be so, and thanks for saying so too.
Now, I just woke up and I can feel Kappa coming back out thinking about those other responses in here so let's get this back on track....
Kappa:
That's how it often happens by the way, another little fun fact.... The switches generally happen on their own but they're usually pretty obviously correlated to we're doing or what's going on, like it seems still in some way related to how our brain organizes our behavior as we switch through different tasks and moods with some similarity to how it would in someone without DID. "We" were thinking about getting back to these responses finally but I was the one who typed the post they were responding to so I was thinking about it the most and voila, here I am to type them out. I can still hear Zeta replaying what she typed before in the back of our head too like people do but she's slowly sinking away again. Anyway, just a little more insight, let's really get to this now....
That's an interesting idea about less serotonin-like psychedelics having a less consistent interaction with serotonin receptors. I never thought about that before, but now that you mention it it sounds pretty plausible. I do know that the exact structure of a receptor can vary from person to person. I remember reading about a study that found that some people have a mutation that causes a variation in one receptor subtype that results in nBOMes having a drastically reduced affinity, something like 100x less than normal. It wouldn't surprise me if future research found variations like that to be common, especially with psychedelics that stray further from the structure of natural neurotransmitters more so than with tryptamines.
Glad you think so, that's how I felt about it at least.

And yeah, I've seen a lot of evidence that there are a number of different functional variants, but so, so few studies actually testing the differences between them; I wonder how different of a picture we would have of certain psychedelic functional activities if they actually took the time to catalogue all the most common ones and tested each and every one of them every time they did those studies?
That's incredibly fascinating about the NBOMes and does indeed seem to pretty much prove my point here to some extent at least. I don't suppose you have any idea what that study was? I might have to go looking for it myself even if you don't because it sounds very interesting, a good proof-of-concept.... NBOMes are... nice? of course but I'd sure love to see some of the older phenethylamines and tryptamines and such run against at least those same ones too, it really would be pretty interesting to see how the consistency holds up especially like for instance as you move down the line from methyl to ethyl to propyl and so on and especially in both directions individually and together....
It's hard to describe how psychedelics differ from one another. One can try to describe what they are like, but descriptive words can never properly express the peculiarities of what an experience is like to someone who hasn't experienced themselves, and you never really know how similar your subjective experience is to someone else's, especially with drugs that have such a complex action. So perhaps phenethylamines don't quite do the same thing to me that they do to you because of the variance in biochemistry between different people, or perhaps how we react to a drug is more a matter of taste, just a result of differing personalities (thought it's probably a mix of both, and in fact the two concepts aren't entirely distinct from one another). There's no way to know. I guess you have more insight into that than I do as you've mentioned that your identities have differing taste in drugs to some degree.
I would definitely agree with everything you have to say here, despite how much we still try to bridge the gap anyway. Most of this I think is mostly just still a matter to ponder at the moment, but I will address the last thing you said really quick because we actually have been gaining a lot more insight into that as of late too....
At the moment, all of us who have actively been thinking about our psychedelic and general drug preferences are honestly pretty distinct in that regard. Lambda thinks that DOB is probably her current favorite psychedelic, but Delta doesn't care that much for it other than thinking it's objectively interesting and useful for us as a whole, I definitely really enjoyed it and would like to do it again but it wasn't the trip we've had that really blew me away the most yet and I'm still kind of trying to form an opinion overall, and Omicron hasn't even really bothered thinking about compared to some of other substances we've been doing lately. Zeta likes the DOB but is even more interested in exploring more of the nutmeg essential oil for similar reasons to the DOB but just liking other things about it even better that mostly relate to the hallucinogenic effects and she thinks it may be her favorite or at least most promising so far, whereas Omicron also thinks it's probably her favorite so far, but for entirely different reasons instead related to its more MDMA-like behavioral effects. Delta so far is in love with 4-AcO-MALT and less so compared to 4-HO-MPT whereas Lambda is currently feeling the opposite, and I'd gladly take either personally! We also recently realized that while a lot of us who have been at the front for a lot of our general psychedelic exploring over the years were kind of unimpressed with 2C-I, Rho absolutely loved it and would be super excited to get it again, and she's also one of the most excited in exploring 2C-EF now for that reason too, while Delta is also excited for the 2C-EF because she prefers 2C-C and is also excited for how it might be more similar to DOB (than to tryptamines anyway) but with a significantly shorter duration, and Zeta also is interested in the DOB connection but not as much for the duration but simply because she's starting to realize that she really likes phenethylamines possibly the most in general.
The bottom line? Yeah, we're all enormously different here in terms of our drug preferences. I'm sure it does help us a LOT in terms of gaining more insight into these kinds of things than other people might have, but at the same time, it's obviously more limited too because we all use the same 5-HT2A receptors and have the same brain and body distribution of these chemicals as they flow through us and that kind of stuff, and as much as we are like different people, in other ways we're still more like different parts of one people, so it's really hard to say how exactly it does relate to what others would feel between two entirely separate human beings.... We do, for instance, all see the exact same geometric visuals layered over the external world, and we so far also think that hallucinations that are more external like deliriants are known for (whether or not they are literally deliriant hallucinations) are also shared between us, but we've also suspected and now since taking the 5-MeO-MiPT especially have more direct evidence that when we have a "breakthrough" style inner hallucinogenic journey, that is genuinely experienced individually by us one at a time and not shared afterward unless we try to project an image of the memory into our shared headspace, and of course that's still just not the same as us actually all going through it together. So, we're kind of all over the place on this.... I don't really have a good way to conclude that thought either, just wanted to provide a bit more insight into that situation as it is. I think in different ways it probably both is and isn't relevant to these sorts of interpersonal differences in experience and preference.
I think there's more to how I feel about phenethylamines vs tryptamines than how stimulating they are. Maybe that's part of it. But phenethylamines just feel so much simpler and less meaningful, they seem to be missing some of the richness of tryptamines. I don't think there are words to properly express their differences, at least not words like "stimulating" or "dissociating". Some people describe tryptamines as being more spiritual than phenethylamines, and though that's not exactly the word I would use, I can't think of any better way to describe it.
Heh.... We actually used to specifically describe phenethylamines as more "spiritual" until we decided that that word was much less useful or clear than words like "stimulating" and "dissociating" so I suppose it's still a matter of preference. ? For the record, at the time we would say that about phenethylamines, we were also saying that tryptamines felt to be the more "human" of them. Again, it's all a matter of preference and there's nothing wrong with viewing it the way you do, but phenethylamines just don't feel any less complex or meaningful than tryptamines to me, just different. I personally find that one of the main differences is that with phenethylamines we just need to provide some input into the experience to really get more out of it, whereas tryptamines provide more of the input for us. This makes the tryptamines easier to go deep on but it makes the phenethylamines more malleable in my opinion, which I think is an incredibly useful and rich quality on its own. When we do go out of our way to make something of the phenethylamine experience, I frankly probably couldn't tell them apart from tryptamine experiences except in the most superficial of ways like duration and onset time and some geometric visual elements. We had easily one of our deepest and richest experiences of any psychedelic ever on 2C-C, and while that was with nitrous oxide mixed in, we've done the same thing on nearly every tryptamine we've ever used without it reaching the same level of significance even once, that was the top nitrous oxide-involved experience period for sure.
I really don't feel like there is a huge distinction between the alkylated 2Cs and the halogenated ones. One thing that I didn't mention before is that 2C-EF really reminded me more of 2C-P than anything else. And while 2C-P feels to me like a middle ground between 2C-E and 2C-B or 2C-C, it can have quite a bit of mindfuck, closer to the 2C-E end of the spectrum, while 2C-EF is much more clearheaded, which is what lead to me to compare it to 2C-B.
That's very interesting.... I'm curious, do you feel like there is a huge distinction between different classes of tryptamines? I honestly don't relatively speaking, not any more than I've noticed between different phenethylamines anyway. Within the class, and just based on the very, very little experience I have actually being able to compare and contrast these different types of phenethylamines, they seemed pretty obviously different to me. 2C-B, 2C-C, and 2C-I all things considered felt extremely similar to one another in comparison to 2C-E, which has some superficial visual similarities but employed them in a still unique and much deeper way and had a totally different headspace, body high, body load, and duration. Honestly I'm not sure I could say they were very similar at all in the grand scheme of things.... But, 2C-E is still one of those ones known for being more unique anyway, so it's hard to say with certainty. We haven't tried 2C-P yet but we do have a small sample to work with so I'll be looking forward to seeing how the comparison holds up.
I will say, while it's across tail substitutions, and there are obviously some
big differences between these two, some things about 4C-D reminded us a lot of DOB. DOC honestly had certain things a lot more in common with 2C-E than 2C-C though, I kind of think moving into amphetamine territory and beyond seems to somewhat bridge the gap between the more unique halogenated phenethylamines and the more traditional "tryptamine-like" style we're used to getting from mushrooms and LSD, which I would also say about 2C-E compared to the others. DOB was honestly so tryptamine-like for us it was shocking, that was definitely one of the heaviest trips we've ever had....
(By the way, I know you asked about that before in the PM and we way left that and everything else hanging.... I don't mean this to be an excuse but Zeta was actually the one typing that and she just recently re-emerged for any significant amount of time after figuring some shit out on the 5-MeO-MiPT. We'd like to get back to that conversation too but have a lot of backlogged conversations we're still trying to catch up on in general.)
Yeah, MALT is really nasty smelling. I'm hesitant to ingest things that have a weird chemical smell. A few months ago I got some MET, which I had smoked a few times previously, and I was really looking forward to trying it orally, but I ended up throwing it away because it smelled like pool chemicals. You haven't tried MET orally have you? If you try it I'd love to read a trip report about it.
I'm wondering, does taste bother you?
Honestly, weird chemicals are going to smell weird.... That's just my perspective on it. I've never had a research chemical that smelled like anything I would ever be willing to ingest for any other reason. Where do you draw the line?
You threw away the MET because of the smell too? That... blows my mind, honestly. Are you expecting these things to smell like flowers? That's money down the drain for an unconfirmed hunch.... I mean, I get wanting to be cautious, but how do you know that's not just legitimately how it smells?
Well, anyway, we haven't taken MET orally yet but we absolutely will, probably very quickly after we start tripping again. We recently were gifted a small sampling of multiple novel phenethylamine and amphetamine psychedelics and have made a promise to prioritize them in return when we do get back to stuff, but since they're all longer-lasting trips from the same class we think we're probably going to go back and forth between them and oral base tryptamines every other trip to avoid tolerance. We have a lot to try that way still but MET is pretty high up on the list, may be the first actually since MPT was so great that way. We actually recently just lucked into some DMT too which we will also eventually be taking orally for the first time as part of all this.
Really interesting theory about how effects of psychedelics differ more and more between individuals the farther they stray from neurotransmitters in structure. It does seem that reactions to DMT are quite consistent overall compared to pretty much any other psychedelic I can think of, and DMT is an endogenous neurotransmitter. And substances such as NBOMes, 4-HO-DPT, and the 2C-T-X series seem to vary wildly in both potency and subjective effects.
Glad you think so too, and my thoughts exactly.

It seems to me like that all could be a lot easier to understand through this lens... though, again, there could still be a million other reasons too.
Interesting, for me, the halogenated vs alkylated 2C-Xs and DOXs are very distinct, though of course there are also similarities. It's especially apparent with the DOXs. DOET and DOiP feel very different from DOC and DOI (though DOF is similar to DOiP), and DOM is a little closer, but still very different, more natural feeling and transparent, less body presence. Also, the halogenated 2C-Xs have a much warmer, more euphoric and recreational feel to me, with a different style of visuals, more of a persian rug sort of effect, vs 2C-D and 2C-E that are more classically psychedelic with perspective shifting, large-scale morphing, and fractals.
This makes me incredibly interested, even more than I already was, to see what some of those alkyl DOx molecules are like myself... since, as I said before, we actually do get some similarities specifically between 2C-E, DOB, and DOC. Would you say anything similar or do you still find the halogens and alkyls pretty different even in cross DOx-2C-x comparisons too?
Really glad to see more reports. I need to jump back in on it-Im probably going to go a little higher from my last which was around 14 mg. Feeling it out it was definitely gentle and gave me no impression that increasing a few more mgs will be problematic. Will definitely post findings.
Will that be the highest dosage reported yet? I feel like it would.... Definitely looking forward to what you'll have to say about it!
If I get around to this, I'll probably go with a rectal ROA. I generally don't get good results with oral 2C-Xs, and I find the dosage-response to be really inconsistent
Out of curiosity, which of them have you taken orally? 2C-I actually was a little bit inconsistent for us.... 2C-C was pretty firm though.
Looking forward to what you'll have to say about it too! ☺