What is wrong with the MDMA available today? - v2

[BlueBull]

I have removed all but one post on this page. For an explanation why, refer to my post one page back. Please stop this back-and-forth bickering in the public forum. If you must duke it out, take it to PM or contact a senior mod if you would like staff to intervene. I don't care what the backstory is, that has nothing to do with the other members. @user666 , I have removed your posts as well because it would have been weird to leave only those behind but you were trying to defuse so this message isn't targeted at you. All further drama will simply be removed without warning. I asked nicely first, now I'm telling. If you don't agree with this or want to discuss it that is of course fine, send me a PM and we'll talk about it

 

[psy997]

I'd love to hear what the community thinks, if any others have had mescaline/MDMA combo tabs

It's pretty much universally accepted that any drugs advertised as included in pressed MDMA pills are not actually there, ala heroin and mescaline. Those are two of the most frequently claimed ones, so far as I'm aware. Generally, except for isolated instances, the only other substances, that I'm aware of, that have been included are byproducts, MDA, bk-MDMA, PMA, caffeine, and methamphetamine.

RE: Mescaline specifically, vash is correct that Mescaline is way too rare and expensive to ever be in pressed pills unless they were a small passion project by a chemist who cares, etc. I'm pretty sure synthetic mescaline is above $100 a gram (don't think I'm breaking pricing here necessarily?), 100mg isn't enough to do much, and so including say 200mg would be hugely increasing cost. Also, you say the MDMA felt like Mescaline. Well, that makes sense. Mescaline and MDMA hit a lot of the same receptors.

 

[vash445]

It's pretty much universally accepted that any drugs advertised as included in pressed MDMA pills are not actually there, ala heroin and mescaline. Those are two of the most frequently claimed ones, so far as I'm aware. Generally, except for isolated instances, the only other substances, that I'm aware of, that have been included are byproducts, MDA, bk-MDMA, PMA, caffeine, and methamphetamine.

RE: Mescaline specifically, vash is correct that Mescaline is way too rare and expensive to ever be in pressed pills unless they were a small passion project by a chemist who cares, etc. I'm pretty sure synthetic mescaline is above $100 a gram (don't think I'm breaking pricing here necessarily?), 100mg isn't enough to do much, and so including say 200mg would be hugely increasing cost. Also, you say the MDMA felt like Mescaline. Well, that makes sense. Mescaline and MDMA hit a lot of the same receptors.

BZP and mCPP/TFMPP also at one point.

It has been detected in pills touted as legal alternatives to illicit stimulants in New Zealand and pills sold as "ecstasy" in Europe and the United States

 

[user666]

BZP and mCPP/TFMPP also at one point.

It has been detected in pills touted as legal alternatives to illicit stimulants in New Zealand and pills sold as "ecstasy" in Europe and the United States

That's true that at the beginning of the century Piperazines and other crap were found in pressed pills, but these substances were easily detectable in any lab, by reagent testkits and even organoleptically, because some of them numbed human tongues.

However, the subject of this thread is not something that is so easily detectable as the aforementioned compounds.

 

[Rectify]

Nothing is wrong with the MDMA available today. It is what it is.

 

[user666]

Nothing is wrong with the MDMA available today. It is what it is.

So how do you explain the issues described in this post ?

 

[unodelacosa]

When I was getting in to MDMA in the early 2000’s there were lots of people complaining about the “loss of magic”
I think this new MehDMA is just that, because there is plenty of good molly and pressies still around.
sure there are probably some bad batches around but it’s not the standard.

I've been saying this. In the U.S. I can get good MDMA (raw or pressed) easily and affordably, and for extra purity a little ice-cold anhydrous acetone wash removes virtually all discoloration. This seems to be the case nationwide, and I can find this on the darknet and locally in most major cities with varying amounts of markup.

I think this “loss of magic” phenomenon can be explained by a combination of group think, confirmation bias, inexperienced drug-users who think they've developed highly sophisticated & sensitive tastes in qualitative high, a general lack of understanding regarding pharmacodynamics, the imperfection of human memory, the tendency to consider one's local community to be a fair evaluation of the rest of the world's communities vis-à-vis resource availability, and a dash of nostalgia with a pinch of lament over the passing of the good ol' glory days of yesteryear. It's a crock of shit and I don't buy it. If someone is unhappy with the quality of a product they are getting—MDMA or literally whatever—they should seek new sources up to and including production of said product (obviously only where legal; void where prohibited; don't break the law, kiddos; etc.).

So how do you explain the issues described in this post ?

Not enough data to draw any conclusions and many explanations have already been postulated, some bearing more merit than others. Here's a possible explanation: @indigoaura is a talented author with an inquisitive mind and a knack for organizing and presenting data in a persuasive manner. What's more, the overarching goal of the post—as clearly stated—is to pursue funding for MDMA impurity research. I feel like we've hit something of a wall until such research can be conducted and—if it correlates with contraband-seizure data from law enforcement—then perhaps some conclusions can be made as to the overall global purity of MDMA, what's caused any actual declines in purity over a certain period of time if this is indeed the case, and what compounds are responsible for this purported drop in qualitative effect, also contingent on verification. Either that or the conclusion is not supported by the data and until empirical evidence can be presented, these are all just very opinionated, highly educated guesses, including my own here.

I mean speculation is fun and all, but there's no sense in arguing a bunch of shit nobody can prove. Inevitably the discussion seems to devolve into the online forum equivalent of a bitch-slap fight. No thanks, ya know?

 

[psy997]

I think this “loss of magic” phenomenon can be explained by a combination of group think, confirmation bias, inexperienced drug-users who think they've developed highly sophisticated & sensitive tastes in qualitative high, a general lack of understanding regarding pharmacodynamics, the imperfection of human memory, the tendency to consider one's local community to be a fair evaluation of the rest of the world's communities vis-à-vis resource availability, and a dash of nostalgia with a pinch of lament over the passing of the good ol' glory days of yesteryear. It's a crock of shit and I don't buy it. If someone is unhappy with the quality of a product they are getting—MDMA or literally whatever—they should seek new sources up to and including production of said product (obviously only where legal; void where prohibited; don't break the law, kiddos; etc.).

I'm just gonna give some short pieces in response to your given factors.

Group think and confirmation bias: possible, but unlikely IMO for two main reason. One, many of us were wondering wtf was happening before we found this thread. Two, a few posters here have adamantly argued against there being a problem with MDMA, sometimes for years, before having personal experiences that were significant abnormal enough for them to instantly shift their perspective. This doesn't 100% prove the phenomenon isn't GT and CB, but it is good evidence that it is not, IMO.

Inexperienced drug users: I'm not totally sure what you mean by this, but the posters in this thread who have had MehDMA experiences pretty much span the gamut from OG MDMA use in the mid 80s (and likely drug use before that) to users who have just started using drugs and MDMA in the past few years.

Lack of understanding of pharmacodynamics: Can you explain more? If I allow my assumptive and slightly defensive brain to run with this one, my response would be something along the lines of "you seem to be the one misunderstanding pharmacodynamics if you're going to claim that we don't know wtf we're talking about when we have proof of MDMA adjacent compounds preventing norepinephrine and dopamine related effects of MDMA, proof of unidentified byproducts in lab tested MDMA, and researchers who have authored some of the aforementioned studies agreeing that synthesis byproducts could affect MDMA in the way hypothesized here." Something like that.

Imperfection of human memory: I had MehDMA before I had good MDMA. Also, you can't totally deny the long time users here who dislike the product for years, sometimes over a decade, then find one batch and are right back to the effects they remembered. For instance, the story shared recently about the dealer who wouldn't sell the sublime pills he had, once he took them himself, despite being offered 10x+ the going price by everyone he had sold them to. That's a pretty crazy group hysteria to claim, especially when the dealer didn't know they were special when he was selling them.

Considering local community a valid litmus test: I've had MehDMA in five states of the US (I won't name them here for privacy reasons, but there is considerable distance between all of them, and the sources I obtained them from ran in very different circles), a Central American country I also won't name, Berlin, and Paris.

"It's a crock of shit and I don't buy it"

Well, let me be blunt, then - it is clear that you have a predetermined conclusion that you are unwilling to part ways with, or even question. I have said it many times and I will say it again here:

I, indigo, and many others of this thread are more than willing to be wrong. Part of me actually hopes that we are all wrong, and that the issue is our physiology, not the product. It would save me a lot of hope and desire for things to change moving forward. As part of that, I am very open to arguments being made as to how our hypotheses are wrong. However, as any good researcher would be, I am only open to arguments that appreciatively account for all factors of the "MehDMA Experience". So far, no-one has been able to make a solid and reasonable proposal suggesting that the issue is individual, without disregarding huge swathes of the evidence collected here. I invite you to break that trend, but it does not seem like you want to.

I know it's fun to be self-righteous about the idiots that have rose colored glasses about the "good ole days," but it certainly doesn't help determine the truth of the matter.

I mean speculation is fun and all, but there's no sense in arguing a bunch of shit nobody can prove. Inevitably the discussion seems to devolve into the online forum equivalent of a bitch-slap fight. No thanks, ya know?

I mostly agree with this except that we've had some good discussion leading to identification of potential impurities to further study.

 

[vash445]

I'm just gonna give some short pieces in response to your given factors.

Group think and confirmation bias: possible, but unlikely IMO for two main reason. One, many of us were wondering wtf was happening before we found this thread. Two, a few posters here have adamantly argued against there being a problem with MDMA, sometimes for years, before having personal experiences that were significant abnormal enough for them to instantly shift their perspective. This doesn't 100% prove the phenomenon isn't GT and CB, but it is good evidence that it is not, IMO.

Inexperienced drug users: I'm not totally sure what you mean by this, but the posters in this thread who have had MehDMA experiences pretty much span the gamut from OG MDMA use in the mid 80s (and likely drug use before that) to users who have just started using drugs and MDMA in the past few years.

Lack of understanding of pharmacodynamics: Can you explain more? If I allow my assumptive and slightly defensive brain to run with this one, my response would be something along the lines of "you seem to be the one misunderstanding pharmacodynamics if you're going to claim that we don't know wtf we're talking about when we have proof of MDMA adjacent compounds preventing norepinephrine and dopamine related effects of MDMA, proof of unidentified byproducts in lab tested MDMA, and researchers who have authored some of the aforementioned studies agreeing that synthesis byproducts could affect MDMA in the way hypothesized here." Something like that.

Imperfection of human memory: I had MehDMA before I had good MDMA. Also, you can't totally deny the long time users here who dislike the product for years, sometimes over a decade, then find one batch and are right back to the effects they remembered. For instance, the story shared recently about the dealer who wouldn't sell the sublime pills he had, once he took them himself, despite being offered 10x+ the going price by everyone he had sold them to. That's a pretty crazy group hysteria to claim, especially when the dealer didn't know they were special when he was selling them.

Considering local community a valid litmus test: I've had MehDMA in five states of the US (I won't name them here for privacy reasons, but there is considerable distance between all of them, and the sources I obtained them from ran in very different circles), a Central American country I also won't name, Berlin, and Paris.

"It's a crock of shit and I don't buy it"

Well, let me be blunt, then - it is clear that you have a predetermined conclusion that you are unwilling to part ways with, or even question. I have said it many times and I will say it again here:

I, indigo, and many others of this thread are more than willing to be wrong. Part of me actually hopes that we are all wrong, and that the issue is our physiology, not the product. It would save me a lot of hope and desire for things to change moving forward. As part of that, I am very open to arguments being made as to how our hypotheses are wrong. However, as any good researcher would be, I am only open to arguments that appreciatively account for all factors of the "MehDMA Experience". So far, no-one has been able to make a solid and reasonable proposal suggesting that the issue is individual, without disregarding huge swathes of the evidence collected here. I invite you to break that trend, but it does not seem like you want to.

I know it's fun to be self-righteous about the idiots that have rose colored glasses about the "good ole days," but it certainly doesn't help determine the truth of the matter.



I mostly agree with this except that we've had some good discussion leading to identification of potential impurities to further study.

He might have never had magic and only Meh...

I've had people who had meh then they tried magic and are like ... ok then this is what I was missing.

 

[BlueBull]

That's true that at the beginning of the century Piperazines and other crap were found in pressed pills, but these substances were easily detectable in any lab, by reagent testkits and even organoleptically, because some of them numbed human tongues.

However, the subject of this thread is not something that is so easily detectable as the aforementioned compounds.

Not only that but the reports I've read about piperazines are almost universally unpleasant. Could be that there's a dose where they are enjoyable but I don't see those as a possible candidate for this discussion

 

[unodelacosa]

He might have never had magic and only Meh...

I've had plenty of different MDMA, everything on the spectrum from “meh” to “magic”, I assure you. I never said that impure MDMA doesn't exist and isn't on the market at all. Quite the contrary, and I've stated this. If you read carefully through my posts you might catch on that I know a bit more on these subjects than the average bear, boo-boo. You might say this is a bit of my personal pic-a-nic basket – I used to manufacture MDMA in the late 90s and early 2000s. Without going into detail, I sourced sassafras oil, distilled the safrole from it, and then performed what's called a p-benzoquinone wacker oxidation to produce the ketone intermediate, MDP-2-P, which I verified and purified with sodium metabisulfite before performing a reductive amination via Al/Hg/Nitromethane amalgam which has the added bonus of producing methylamine in situ and has very high yield. Acid base extraction, vacuum distillation (just like the ketone), bubbled HCl gas into a non-polar solution to solidify pyrex dishes full of MDMA crystals. And finally, I would purify this through recrystallization from a two solvent system of boiling IPA and then ice-cold anhydrous acetone. Believe me when I tell you, brother, I know my MDMA, and I know it well.

 

[unodelacosa]

I'm just gonna give some short pieces in response to your given factors.

Group think and confirmation bias: possible, but unlikely IMO for two main reason. One, many of us were wondering wtf was happening before we found this thread. Two, a few posters here have adamantly argued against there being a problem with MDMA, sometimes for years, before having personal experiences that were significant abnormal enough for them to instantly shift their perspective. This doesn't 100% prove the phenomenon isn't GT and CB, but it is good evidence that it is not, IMO.

Inexperienced drug users: I'm not totally sure what you mean by this, but the posters in this thread who have had MehDMA experiences pretty much span the gamut from OG MDMA use in the mid 80s (and likely drug use before that) to users who have just started using drugs and MDMA in the past few years.

Lack of understanding of pharmacodynamics: Can you explain more? If I allow my assumptive and slightly defensive brain to run with this one, my response would be something along the lines of "you seem to be the one misunderstanding pharmacodynamics if you're going to claim that we don't know wtf we're talking about when we have proof of MDMA adjacent compounds preventing norepinephrine and dopamine related effects of MDMA, proof of unidentified byproducts in lab tested MDMA, and researchers who have authored some of the aforementioned studies agreeing that synthesis byproducts could affect MDMA in the way hypothesized here." Something like that.

Imperfection of human memory: I had MehDMA before I had good MDMA. Also, you can't totally deny the long time users here who dislike the product for years, sometimes over a decade, then find one batch and are right back to the effects they remembered. For instance, the story shared recently about the dealer who wouldn't sell the sublime pills he had, once he took them himself, despite being offered 10x+ the going price by everyone he had sold them to. That's a pretty crazy group hysteria to claim, especially when the dealer didn't know they were special when he was selling them.

Considering local community a valid litmus test: I've had MehDMA in five states of the US (I won't name them here for privacy reasons, but there is considerable distance between all of them, and the sources I obtained them from ran in very different circles), a Central American country I also won't name, Berlin, and Paris.

"It's a crock of shit and I don't buy it"

Well, let me be blunt, then - it is clear that you have a predetermined conclusion that you are unwilling to part ways with, or even question. I have said it many times and I will say it again here:

I, indigo, and many others of this thread are more than willing to be wrong. Part of me actually hopes that we are all wrong, and that the issue is our physiology, not the product. It would save me a lot of hope and desire for things to change moving forward. As part of that, I am very open to arguments being made as to how our hypotheses are wrong. However, as any good researcher would be, I am only open to arguments that appreciatively account for all factors of the "MehDMA Experience". So far, no-one has been able to make a solid and reasonable proposal suggesting that the issue is individual, without disregarding huge swathes of the evidence collected here. I invite you to break that trend, but it does not seem like you want to.

I know it's fun to be self-righteous about the idiots that have rose colored glasses about the "good ole days," but it certainly doesn't help determine the truth of the matter.



I mostly agree with this except that we've had some good discussion leading to identification of potential impurities to further study.

Ok you've obviously taken a bunch of personal offense to what I've opined here, and there are becoming too many points to respond to without it becoming something of a tedium. I'm gonna try to streamline my response here, if I failed to directly address a point made above, just know I'm not trying to be a dick or sabotage your efforts. To be clear, I respect many of the bright minds on this site and it's for this reason that I've engaged in these discussions. Not everyone chiming in is on exactly the same level, so for example when I stated my combination of factors and I mention a lack of pharmacodynamic understanding I'm not explicitly referring to your understanding, but rather listing one reason for the collective phenomenon of “loss of magic” for lack of a better term.

Also, let me reiterate that I do not have a predetermined conclusion. I said until we can get empirical evidence in the form of the necessary tests to verify the hypothesis, debating this shit is pointless. Being all defensive and calling me self-righteous just proves my other point, like I said: online bitch-slap fights. No thanks.

 

[user666]

Ok you've obviously taken a bunch of personal offense to what I've opined here, and there are becoming too many points to respond to without it becoming something of a tedium.

Actually you should make the effort to address all of his non ad-Hominem objections if you are an honest debater.

 

[unodelacosa]

As part of that, I am very open to arguments being made as to how our hypotheses are wrong.

“Very open”?

However, as any good researcher would be, I am only open to arguments that […]

“Very open”?

[…] appreciatively account for all factors of the "MehDMA Experience". So far, no-one has been able to make a solid and reasonable proposal suggesting that the issue is individual, without disregarding huge swathes of the evidence collected here.

I disagree with you here, and I do not consider some of the more reasonable alternative explanations to disregard huge swathes of evidence, particularly when the bulk of this evidence is anecdotal.

I invite you to break that trend, but it does not seem like you want to.

No, it doesn't seem that way? I just want to point out that I've been active in this discussion since joining Bluelight this past February, including posting helpful links and getting positive feedback from others for these efforts and time investment on a thread that ultimately helps its cause, something you appear to have a vested interest in, wouldn't you say? For example, I recently collected a bunch of relevant literature links and put this in post #388 on April 22nd. https://www.bluelight.org/xf/thread...-mdma-available-today-v2.895430/post-15160291 So maybe ease up on the rage posting just for remaining skeptical. Prove me wrong and then you can gloat all you want, but until then, cálmate, compadre. Tranquilo. Todo bien.

 

[unodelacosa]

Actually you should make the effort to address all of his non ad-Hominem objections if you are an honest debater.

Yeah I'm working on it. I'm just also busy with other stuff, so just hang tight

EDIT: done. See below.

EDIT 2: Also, “if you're an honest debater” is a shitty, manipulative-esque thing to say, and I don't appreciate it, @user666, but I'm letting it slide because after all: you might be a master debater, but I'm a cunning linguist. Ah thank you. Lol. But for reals though, please don't call into question my honesty. Skim through my 123 messages on here so far and tell me if you really think I'm some kind of "dishonest debater"?

Hope I satisfied your goddamn criteria here. And also, I wouldn't describe @psy997 's objections as entirely not ad hominem. Both he and @vash445 have at least partially aimed their arguments at me personally, trying to discredit me or question my expertise on the subject. @vash445 insultingly postulated I “might have never had magic and only Meh…” while @psy997 accused me of being self-righteous. I'm not knocking ad hominem arguments that are valid. I made them several times through my posts along with arguments that directly questioned the hypothesis and not the qualifications, knowledge, and expertise of the person(s) hypothesizing.

Oh yeah I have more to respond to from one of your earlier posts on this thread regarding what you call “objective proof of meh-MDMA's existence”. You are a perfect example of someone on this thread not grasping everything and not being aware of how actual science works. More on that below, and please don't goad me into this shit again so I don't have to split wigs over the pseudoscience being hurled around like monkey shit by some posters (but not all).

 

[unodelacosa]

Group think and confirmation bias: possible, but unlikely IMO for two main reason. One, many of us were wondering wtf was happening before we found this thread.

This isn't science. You want to quantify that for me? “Many of us” according to whom? You know this is not good evidence; this is hearsay and opinions. I'm not saying it isn't true, but I'm saying this does not prove it's existence. You're requiring me to believe that there is actually a huge number of people experiencing this and I question the validity of the claim. Subjectively it may seem true to some people, but this doesn't confirm it exists or else we'd all believe in ghosts and Santa Claus and shit like that.

Two, a few posters here have adamantly argued against there being a problem with MDMA, sometimes for years, before having personal experiences that were significant abnormal enough for them to instantly shift their perspective.

A few posters here, huh? That's solid evidence if I've ever heard any… Come on, man. How am I supposed to take this seriously? This is not useful evidence; it's more anecdotal data at best if it's verifiable.

Your arguments above do not disprove confirmation bias and groupthink, QED.

This response is by request, by the way. I've accepted that we're not going to agree on this, most likely, and that's okay. But, just responding to most points one at a time here…

Inexperienced drug users: I'm not totally sure what you mean by this, but the posters in this thread who have had MehDMA experiences pretty much span the gamut from OG MDMA use in the mid 80s (and likely drug use before that) to users who have just started using drugs and MDMA in the past few years.

What I'm saying is: some of the people chiming in with comments like “Yeah I had MDMA a year and a half ago and it was magical, and now this is my fifth time rolling and it's all just garbage anymore. You're right: it's lost the magic. I'm 22 and I live in a town in Iceland called Zckhauidvkaykalk which is about 550 kilometers North of Reykjavik, so you know we get all the best molly, both in the local scene and on the darkwebz” … they're not tremendously helpful, but it still kinda feels like another voice who agrees with you. And also there's probably a notion in some of the more impressionable Bluelighters' heads of something like “Holy shit, all these smart, eloquent motherfuckers on here are all posting things saying MDMA has lost its magic, and I want this group to approve of me; I want these guys to like me, sooooo yeah maybe MDMA really has lost its magic; after all, I can't seem to roll hard anymore and I have to take a bunch to feel it” never minding the fact that they're taking MDMA every weekend because they just don't really believe what people say about tolerance or whatever dumb reason they lie to themselves about…

slightly defensive brain

Yeah you nailed that one for me. You are definitely being defensive for no reason, especially with what followed – the equivalent of saying "I know you are but what am I?" (or “you're the one who doesn't understand pharmaco stuff, meanie!”). Did you miss the part earlier in this discussion where we were discussing MDDMA and MDTMA specifically and the unique binding action of MDDMA, especially in how its preference for binding site changes dependent on the presence of MDMA/MDA? I've been contributing to this discussion in positive ways, some of them being constructive criticism and some of them being supportive. Not everyone; however, has the necessary knowledge/education already to digest some of this literature. I'm not talking about you, me, @indigoaura or anyone else who has clearly been participating and keeping up with the discussion, but rather some of the vocal proponents of the certainty displayed toward the hypothesis, posters like the aforementioned Icelandic example.

You know, I just might be someone with real knowledge on the subject. You should consider that before you trash my opinion.

Imperfection of human memory: I had MehDMA before I had good MDMA. Also, you can't totally deny the long time users here who dislike the product for years, sometimes over a decade, then find one batch and are right back to the effects they remembered. For instance, the story shared recently about the dealer who wouldn't sell the sublime pills he had, once he took them himself, despite being offered 10x+ the going price by everyone he had sold them to. That's a pretty crazy group hysteria to claim, especially when the dealer didn't know they were special when he was selling them.

Man, you are really easily swayed by anecdotal evidence. Way to hold on to your opinion before the science confirms things…

I've never said that there isn't shitty MDMA out there. It exists, and I've consumed it before and noted it. I'll never be able to test any of the shitty MDMA I had back in 2014, for example, though (because it's gone now), so I've simply accepted that no one will ever know what the deal was with that shit or why no one who took it was particularly happy with it. I already know about this garbage on the market, and I, too, have been angry about it. However, I found other sources and quickly found proper MDMA again. Sorry if some of you aren't resourceful enough, lucky enough, or whatever other factors or combination therein would've lead you to better drugs, but what do you want me to do about that now? Pretend as though all MDMA in 2021 is that same shitty batch I had seven years ago because a few opinionated and articulate motherfuckers on Bluelight insist this is the case? Also, note: “crazy group hysteria” is not good evidence, either. It's sort of the opposite here.

Considering local community a valid litmus test: I've had MehDMA in five states of the US (I won't name them here for privacy reasons, but there is considerable distance between all of them, and the sources I obtained them from ran in very different circles), a Central American country I also won't name, Berlin, and Paris.

And you don't question if it's you? You think it's the worlds' MDMA? Hey, maybe you're right; maybe it really is the world's MDMA and I'm just stupid, crazy, or lucky or something… Idk, because I don't have enough data to be certain and I'm not going to base things on my own singular subjective experiences coupled with a loose collection of groupthink anecdotes that agree with mine.

Well, let me be blunt, then - it is clear that you have a predetermined conclusion that you are unwilling to part ways with, or even question.

Says the pot to the kettle.

I, indigo, and many others of this thread are more than willing to be wrong.

“More than willing to be wrong”? Strange phraseology. Kinda like you mean the opposite, like when a friend loses their job and you ask them how they're taking it and they keep saying shit like, “Oh yeah I'm great with this! This is the best thing that could ever happen to me, in fact! Their loss!” but you can see they're actually terrified they're wrong and are trying to ward that thought away with overly strong qualifiers in their speech…

I know it's fun to be self-righteous about the idiots that have rose colored glasses about the "good ole days," but it certainly doesn't help determine the truth of the matter.

Nah, it's more fun to take apart the self-righteous. And anyway, you're wrong – pointing out those with rose-colored glasses in fact does provide us with one of many alternative reasons/explanations for the so-called "loss of magic" phenomenon. In turn, this helps determine the truth of the matter, even if it isn't the “truth” you were hoping for…

I mostly agree with this except that we've had some good discussion leading to identification of potential impurities to further study.

I'm sorry, which potential impurities were uniquely first identified here on this discussion? How was this accomplished and in which researcher's lab? Is it safe to assume a paper was published on this in one of the journals? Please tell me you're not just saying that the compounds MDDMA and MDTMA simply just came to your attention personally through this thread which links to actual studies that had already been conducted, because if so, that's some bullshit wording you're using there and who are you really trying to convince?

 

[Mr. Krinkle]

lol

oh boy

for me and most ppl i talk to, it's always been hit and miss since i can remember with MDMA and i can remember since 1993

 

[unodelacosa]

lol

oh boy

for me and most ppl i talk to, it's always been hit and miss since i can remember with MDMA and i can remember since 1993

Right, same. That's what I mean – I think younger heads think it's a new phenomenon, and it just isn't. We all had pills in the 90s that were unbelievable, practically indescribable; but we also encountered bunk pills, weak pills, pills with designer drugs / RCs instead, speed pills, etc. etc. Presses would gain a good reputation, but soon some imposter pills would arrive with that dye press and everyone would avoid them and move on to the next thing that came through the area.

Also, having moderate or mellow experiences on MDMA is something not uncommon either. If you read about Shulgin's experiences with MDMA in Book I of PiHKAL, he doesn't exactly gush on about MDMA, but instead likens it to a martini at a cocktail party. Not really a mind-blower to him, though clearly in the anecdotal, qualitative comments, MDMA blew some of his test group people's minds, pretty clearly. This alone should speak to what I'm trying to say. Magical MDMA experiences can be fickle at times in whether they manifest for us. I don't think any of us can guarantee a profound experience to another with any certainty. I can only guess as to why this seems to be true, and I freely admit this is my own conjecture, FWIW. I could always be wrong.

 

[unodelacosa]

Well, so there you go. This could be the first objective proof of meh-MDMA's existence.

Firstly, “meh” MDMA is a highly subjective, qualitative, unscientific term. In no respectable paper in any serious journal will you find reference to "meh MDMA" or any variations of this term marrying the informal “meh” as a qualifier to the chemical shorthand of “MDMA”.

Secondly, everyone already knows that impure MDMA that results in a less than optimal MDMA experience exists. It's not a new thing; it has been around as long as really pure, excellent MDMA has. Both are still out there on the market as many MDMA labs all over the globe still exist.

Thirdly, are you forgetting what “objective” versus “subjective” means? HowTF is one person, one subject – @indigoaura – how is that one subject's experience “objective” in any way?

Unfortunately it would be an in-vivo test,

Why would this be unfortunate? And why the comma here?

that relies on pupil dilation measurement in controlled light conditions

That's the only biological data you would base this on? Do you have any idea what you're talking about, and have you conducted any actual scientific studies funded by some grant, private company, or university? I suspect you're speaking about things you're not experienced in yet.

with:
1) meh-MDMA + 2CB
2) 2CB + meh-MDMA
3) magic-MDMA + 2CB
4) 2CB + magic-MDMA

Again: “meh-MDMA” is a colloquial term, not science. You would have to define the actual compound(s) in question, state how you verified the compounds, and list their IUPAC names. “Meh-MDMA” would not suffice.

Also, it's worth delineating here what you mean by, for example, “MDMA + 2CB” and how it differs from “2CB + MDMA”. I assume you're talking about candyflipping, meaning to say taking one, waiting until just after the peak and the piggybacking the other one. Just my $0.02 here but it works best for me to take the MDMA first and when peaking, drop the psychedelic (be it 2C-B, mushrooms, or LSD). Brings the wonderful social nature of the MDMA into the trip for the most pleasant combination. You don't even notice the anxiogenic come-up of the psychedelic; it just extends your MDMA roll, and smoothly transitions to a wonderful trip in which your speech facilities mostly stay in tact and being social comes easily even though you're tripping. I highly recommend this experience.

Also worth noting, besides “candyflipping” there's also “trolling” which is a portmanteau of “tripping” and “rolling” (get it? “trolling”?) and that's where you dose both MDMA and a psychedelic at the same time. I don't like it as much as the aforementioned method, but to me, tripping first, then rolling is the wrong way to go in my opinion.

...but still a valid test.

Valid in what world and to whom?

 

[Le Junk]

Nothing is wrong with the MDMA available today. It is what it is.

Lol, it definitely is what it is. Crap. To say there’s nothing wrong with today’s MDMA tells me one thing...you haven’t done any ecstasy pre-2010. If the only car I’ve ever driven in my lifetime was a Ford Focus, I would think the Ford Focus was the best car in the world.