• MDMA &
    Empathogenic
    Drugs

    Welcome Guest!

What is wrong with the MDMA available today?

Status
Not open for further replies.
whether or not this will or won't be detected as mdma by a gcms I don't know
Click to expand...

The mass spectra of N-isopropylbenzylamine and methamphetamine are quite different, and would be expected to have differing retrntion times.

Compare the NIST spectra for N-iso versus methamphetamine.
NSFW:
cbook.cgi

cbook.cgi

They have very different fragmentation patterns: methamphetamine lacks the molecular ion (no peak at 149 amu) and has a strong peak at 58 amu (N-methylethylamine radical)... the 91 amu toluene radical is also much stronger in the N-iso spectrum. So I have no doubt a MS could identify N-iso accurately.
 
A better question would be, why shouldn't we trust the GCMS analyses? N-iso would have a different retention time* & different mass spectrum - you couldn't get any more definitive than that.

* Kovats retention index of meth = 1161, N-iso = 1149, source: NIST

The only conceivable "better" test than a GCMS would be a LCMS, in the case that the impurity is non-volatile or thermally degraded/destroyed (both unlikely, and could be fixed by derivatization agents to allow GC)

From a Joe Rogan Experience podcast I just heard:
[2:21:50] Hamilton Morris: You know, people will always come up to me and say "What's the deal with MDMA? It used to be like this, and now it's like
this. What accounts for that?" It's like, well, don't underestimate your own changes over time. When I was 21 I could drink alcohol - not that I did very often, but I could - and not want to kill myself the next day. Now, If I try to drink more than three drinks I'm going to feel horrible the next day. Like, emotionally ruined. And that's me, not alcohol.
 
Last edited:
No one discounts the changes that go along with aging. However, that same person who can only handle three drinks without a hangover still gets drunk. The alcohol still produces the alcohol effect, the body just reacts differently. Easy enough to explain that through vitamin deficiencies that get worse and worse with years of drinking. I bet if Joe Rogan suddenly did not get drunk at all, he may wonder what was up with the alcohol.
 
sekio said:
A better question would be, why shouldn't we trust the GCMS analyses? N-iso would have a different retention time* & different mass spectrum - you couldn't get any more definitive than that.

* Kovats retention index of meth = 1161, N-iso = 1149, source: NIST

The only conceivable "better" test than a GCMS would be a LCMS, in the case that the impurity is non-volatile or thermally degraded/destroyed (both unlikely, and could be fixed by derivatization agents to allow GC)

From a Joe Rogan Experience podcast I just heard:
[2:21:50] Hamilton Morris: You know, people will always come up to me and say "What's the deal with MDMA? It used to be like this, and now it's like
this. What accounts for that?" It's like, well, don't underestimate your own changes over time. When I was 21 I could drink alcohol - not that I did very often, but I could - and not want to kill myself the next day. Now, If I try to drink more than three drinks I'm going to feel horrible the next day. Like, emotionally ruined. And that's me, not alcohol.
Click to expand...

So because Hamilton (not really the expert he’s painted as but..) can’t drink alcohol anymore that instantly applies to a substance that’s about the complete opposite of it in every way?.. I’ve heard this quote many times and it’s a moronic one at that.

Alcohol is a dirty toxic drug that harms many organs in the body, it’s structure closely resembles many other substances that are known poisons.

MDMA, a much more complex molecule, is selectively neurotoxic to serotonin only and only when taken in larger doses.

I can’t see how much, if any comparisons can be made of the two.

-GC
 
sekio said:
A better question would be, why shouldn't we trust the GCMS analyses? N-iso would have a different retention time* & different mass spectrum - you couldn't get any more definitive than that.

* Kovats retention index of meth = 1161, N-iso = 1149, source: NIST

The only conceivable "better" test than a GCMS would be a LCMS, in the case that the impurity is non-volatile or thermally degraded/destroyed (both unlikely, and could be fixed by derivatization agents to allow GC)

From a Joe Rogan Experience podcast I just heard:
[2:21:50] Hamilton Morris: You know, people will always come up to me and say "What's the deal with MDMA? It used to be like this, and now it's like
this. What accounts for that?" It's like, well, don't underestimate your own changes over time. When I was 21 I could drink alcohol - not that I did very often, but I could - and not want to kill myself the next day. Now, If I try to drink more than three drinks I'm going to feel horrible the next day. Like, emotionally ruined. And that's me, not alcohol.
Click to expand...

People are getting confused with GCMS that is then processed to identify peaks using a spectral library to interpret the peaks and GCMS analysed by a human who actually knows what they are doing. The data is in the TIC but the library works on the dot product of the reference spectrum and the integrated peak spectrum at maximum value. The testing labs fire reference MDMA through then the unknown sample and then say the unknown contains MDMA and that is pretty much the end of it unless the library matches one of the other peaks and someone can be bothered to add that to the report.
GCMS with ultra inert is pretty damn good even for active compounds, whether derivitized or not.

LCMS has poor chromatographic separation compared to GCMS especially for small molecules, add in its other quirks, matrix effects including ion suppresion, detergent contamination, solvent reactions, then soft inconsistant ionisation, insuficient fragmentation, extreme variation in fragmentation and signal due to analyser pressure. No LCMS libraries. LCMS is easy to break it with unknown quality or dirty samples, just ask anyone who looks after walk up machines in pharma.

Like all tools GCMS and LCMS have their uses. A hammer for a nail, a spanner for a nut etc

Morris has gone far, so did Krystle Cole from the silo. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
So because Hamilton (not really the expert he’s painted as but..) can’t drink alcohol anymore that instantly applies to a substance that’s about the complete opposite of it in every way?.. I’ve heard this quote many times and it’s a moronic one at that.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point: in a more concise manner it could be stated as "Set and setting should never be totally discounted". (As an aside, Hamilton comes across as a knowledgeable individual who strives to remain logical, evidence-based, and non-"magical" -at least to my eyes. I don't get why people dislike the content he produces.)


The alcohol still produces the alcohol effect, the body just reacts differently.
Click to expand...

So why can't we have MDMA produce the MDMA effect reliably (as it should), but people's body/mind reacting differently?

LCMS has poor chromatographic separation compared to GCMS especially for small molecules, add in its other quirks, matrix effects including ion suppresion, detergent contamination, solvent reactions, then soft inconsistant ionisation, insuficient fragmentation, extreme variation in fragmentation and signal due to analyser pressure. No LCMS libraries. LCMS is easy to break it with unknown quality or dirty samples, just ask anyone who looks after walk up machines in pharma.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info byte. I have never personally worked with a HPLC. They do seem awfully finicky compared to the GC.
 
Last edited:
G_Chem said:
So because Hamilton (not really the expert he’s painted as but..) can’t drink alcohol anymore that instantly applies to a substance that’s about the complete opposite of it in every way?.. I’ve heard this quote many times and it’s a moronic one at that.

Alcohol is a dirty toxic drug that harms many organs in the body, it’s structure closely resembles many other substances that are known poisons.

MDMA, a much more complex molecule, is selectively neurotoxic to serotonin only and only when taken in larger doses.

I can’t see how much, if any comparisons can be made of the two.

-GC
Click to expand...

So how does Hamilton explain the fact that I, as his senior by a decade or two, could drink the cunt under the table and still get up for work the next morning fresh as a daisy..?
 
sekio said:
You're missing the point: in a more concise manner it could be stated as "Set and setting should never be totally discounted". (As an aside, Hamilton comes across as a knowledgeable individual who strives to remain logical, evidence-based, and non-"magical" -at least to my eyes. I don't get why people dislike the content he produces.)




So why can't we have MDMA produce the MDMA effect reliably (as it should), but people's body/mind reacting differently?


Thanks for the info byte. I have never personally worked with a HPLC. They do seem awfully finicky compared to the GC.
Click to expand...

Have you seen his Sapo Documentary?.. Yea they eventually sculpted him into someone worth watching (or did he take enough psychedelics to get over himself?). Either way I’ll admit he’s much better now that he’s older but that Sapo Doc really drove me crazy, his utter disrespect for the natives that watched over him was sickening and just makes me cringe that he is our “representative.”

Maybe he did trip enough to get around that person he used to be. I’ll admit his Vice show is fun to watch and his willingness to put himself out there and trip on TV with all the barriers down is respectable.

Idk I just feel so many people could do it better than him. Enough about Hamilton..

Also I don’t understand how set and setting can be so strong as to produce reliable results time and time again. I’ve inadvertently played with placebo on myself, it only works for so long.

My mother once gave me pills which she thought (and in my trust I thought) were Ambien. First night I took them I had about 90% normal effects, full placebo. Second night maybe 30-40%. I was surprised by the sudden increase in tolerance but not enough to warrant further investigation. Third night I barely felt it, upon searching up the pills I realized they weren’t Ambien at all.

In my opinion people feel the true nature of a drug eventually, on one experience I can understand it but when people get the same effect off the same batch consistently I tend to believe them.

And I should remind people I rarely (if ever, I’m willing to accept maybe I’ve had placebo/set/setting issues here as well) come across this meh product. I think I have a few times but generally once I try it I don’t use it again.

All MDMA I take is “magic” and I’m 15 or so years in, if I was gonna lose the magic I’d assume I’d done so by now.

The biggest reason I believe ya’ll on this is that I know people who’ve lost the magic. My brother in particular. He abused it like no one I’ve seen, years of full weekend use, UK style. While he admits it’s not the same I notice he does still get the social and energy sides as do others who’ve burntvout.

Generally people that lose the magic have shorter experiences, less of that overwhelming love and gushy feeling. They aren’t lethargic like some of the shit today will do, they don’t get brutally nasty comedowns, they still seem to be enjoying it. Their pupils are dilated. Etc.

-GC
 
F.U.B.A.R. said:
So how does Hamilton explain the fact that I, as his senior by a decade or two, could drink the cunt under the table and still get up for work the next morning fresh as a daisy..?
Click to expand...
Some ppl just get to the point where alcohol becomes unenjoyable.i also won't touch the shit.join two of them together back to back (1,4bdo) and I'll drink that.
 
Finally, I was able to buy a good product that dilates eyes, locks the jaw is energetic and lovey at 80mg for 5h. The product is locally made from piperonal and looks like white sugar. The Marquis reagent goes purple to black in 2sec.
I still have the Meh stuff from DW. It goes straight to black with Marquis is sleepy and does not widen the pupils.
 
Last edited:
OK, but doesn't the piperonal synthesis proceed via MDP2NP (Henry reaction with nitroethane) which is then either reduced to MDA & methylated, or oxidised in a Nef reaction to MDP2P and then reacted with methylamine and a reducing agent (Al, NaBH4, NaCNBH3, LiAlH4, catalytic hydrogenation, etc)? Do you know which specific route was used? I personally don;t think it matters, but the discussion would benefit from detailed infor.
 
Just gonna put my .02$ in here, and I’ll note that I’m too young to have been around in the “glory days” of MDMA. That said an interesting psychological effect I’ve noticed is what I call the “chestnut torte effect”

Every Christmas my family has a nice big feast and we always have homemade chestnut torte for dessert. Now the recipe for this torte was only ever stored in my great grandmothers head and when she passed 10 years ago so began the process of recreating this torte. My grandma took it up and being the excellent cook she is as well ashaving witnessed the baking of said torte many times before, it tasted exactly the same as when her mother made it. Over the years, however, my relatives have slowly begun to say that “huh this one tastes different” and “something’s missing, it’s not quite right” every time we eat it. Now personally I don’t notice any difference other than standard fluctuations in texture or density but nothing outside of the realm of normal baking errors. With my relatives the complaints of it “not being quite right” have only grown in number. And Ive experimented with this theory. Two years ago I recorded the recipe my grandmother used to bake it and I made sure she used the exact same procedure the next year. Yet even with objectively identical recipes my relatives still said that “last years was better”.

Personally I believe that as they aged and had eaten more of this torte over the years they simply lost some of its magic (it truly is an incredible torte). Now I don’t mean to dissuade discussion of various syntheses and such in this thread as I do believe that can make a significant difference, however, I dont think the effect of simply aging and spending more time with this substance is to be ignored completely.

ive had incredible MDMA (reagent tested with marquis, madelin, and mecke) that has had all the effects old timers talk about. MDMA today doesn’t necessarily have anything wrong with it, maybe it’s just you...
 
thegreenhand said:
Just gonna put my .02$ in here, and I’ll note that I’m too young to have been around in the “glory days” of MDMA. That said an interesting psychological effect I’ve noticed is what I call the “chestnut torte effect”

Every Christmas my family has a nice big feast and we always have homemade chestnut torte for dessert. Now the recipe for this torte was only ever stored in my great grandmothers head and when she passed 10 years ago so began the process of recreating this torte. My grandma took it up and being the excellent cook she is as well ashaving witnessed the baking of said torte many times before, it tasted exactly the same as when her mother made it. Over the years, however, my relatives have slowly begun to say that “huh this one tastes different” and “something’s missing, it’s not quite right” every time we eat it. Now personally I don’t notice any difference other than standard fluctuations in texture or density but nothing outside of the realm of normal baking errors. With my relatives the complaints of it “not being quite right” have only grown in number. And Ive experimented with this theory. Two years ago I recorded the recipe my grandmother used to bake it and I made sure she used the exact same procedure the next year. Yet even with objectively identical recipes my relatives still said that “last years was better”.

Personally I believe that as they aged and had eaten more of this torte over the years they simply lost some of its magic (it truly is an incredible torte). Now I don’t mean to dissuade discussion of various syntheses and such in this thread as I do believe that can make a significant difference, however, I dont think the effect of simply aging and spending more time with this substance is to be ignored completely.

ive had incredible MDMA (reagent tested with marquis, madelin, and mecke) that has had all the effects old timers talk about. MDMA today doesn’t necessarily have anything wrong with it, maybe it’s just you...
Click to expand...

Just like MDMA of old, the “ingredients” are not quite what they used to be. GMO crap bred to repel bugs not for the flavor. Farming practices that have essentially depleted our foods of many nutrients and minerals essential to our well being. I’d be willing to bet years back food on the shelves had a bit more pride put into it.

All that said, I get what your saying and in that case indeed loss of novelty. Idk this is just different.

To compare this to your torte analogy would be like saying the torte went from a sweet tasty treat to a pile of literal shit. Not just “not quite as good.” Also it doesn’t factor in why this “torte” sometimes still tastes good...

-GC
 
Is the MDMA that
G_Chem said:
Just like MDMA of old, the “ingredients” are not quite what they used to be. GMO crap bred to repel bugs not for the flavor. Farming practices that have essentially depleted our foods of many nutrients and minerals essential to our well being. I’d be willing to bet years back food on the shelves had a bit more pride put into it.

All that said, I get what your saying and in that case indeed loss of novelty. Idk this is just different.

To compare this to your torte analogy would be like saying the torte went from a sweet tasty treat to a pile of literal shit. Not just “not quite as good.” Also it doesn’t factor in why this “torte” sometimes still tastes good...

-GC
Click to expand...
Is the MDMA that you are calling “a literal pile of shit” reagent or lab tested? I don’t mean to be condescending but I have hard time believing that the same chemical compound (give or take the chirality) could provide such vastly different effects. The more logical explanation to me would be that one is simply not MDMA or at least MDMA cut with something else
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top