@unodelacosa
man you're totally missing the point... it's not ridiculing me that we solve this.
I can't produce evidence, we would need a lab for this, still there are so many different clues that suggests that this is an hypothesis that deserves real attention and not being discarded right away.
By all means I would be very happy to be proven wrong with real data.
In fact you could start from pepper and produce mdma completely OTC. More steps required of course.
If you and your buddies control the production, distribution and ultimately the market without competition you can sell everything you want, and a short acting, weaker by mg/kg is it more profitable simply because users consume more of it, therefore you sell more of it, why selling something that is fully active at a certain dosage and lasts 4-6 hours when you can sell a sub par substance that you need double amount and last half the time?
Still, not a scientist but last my two cents:
science is not questionable, is based on data, when this data is not available hypotheses are made and are confirmed or disproved through experimentation and/or data acquisition.
We have all the data we need:
Meh appeared after shifting from natural to synthetic precursor
it follows that the difference is due to the precursor
now you have two different hypotheses:
man you're totally missing the point... it's not ridiculing me that we solve this.
None taken, it is not conjecture it is what remains after ruling out all the other possible options, after all this is a years long thread.You mean, *2,3-dimethoxy ring, and this is bad logic without underlying evidence; again just poorly informed conjecture, no disrespect.mooka said:
If you forget for a moment what Kranenburg told you, and start analyzing the issue with a fresh mind you can see that the ortho, or 2,3 deoxyring position isomer is the only viable option here,
I can't produce evidence, we would need a lab for this, still there are so many different clues that suggests that this is an hypothesis that deserves real attention and not being discarded right away.
By all means I would be very happy to be proven wrong with real data.
No, but I've studied chemistry in high school as many others long time ago, still is a quite basic set of reactions (2 max 3 with the proper starting materials, you can find any required precursor online, it's not a secret), it is something doable by any college level chemistry student. There's plenty of kids doing stuff on various reddit subs. It doesn't involve exotic substances, neither requires protection from atmosphere, involves maintaining critical temperatures ranges or highly technical and expensive lab gear, in fact there's a nice procedure on rhodium that shows the final reduction performed in a modified plastic bucket). And no one in the 90's was using lab grade solvents.Oh so you’ve synthesized it yourself? In your “accademic” pursuits, you were a chemical engineer and that’s what gives you the authority to say with confidence “mdma chemistry is pretty basic and simple”? And are you framing this within the context of clandestine chemistry and working with suboptimal environments with chemicals that aren’t always reagent grade and all of this without any advanced analytical equipment? And btw I’m speaking from experience with this – I’ve synthesized MDMA.mooka said:
mdma chemistry is pretty basic and simple.
In fact you could start from pepper and produce mdma completely OTC. More steps required of course.
Sorry man totally disagree here.Wrong. The more potent the drug, the more profitable it is to produce it. The best evidence of this is LSD. Just producing 1 kilogram is 10 million hits of LSD. This is why no one hardly ever produces Mescaline any more – threshold dose is too low.mooka said:
Fact: It's more profitable than MDMA, because of its shorter duration and due to being less potent by mg/Kg users consume more
If you and your buddies control the production, distribution and ultimately the market without competition you can sell everything you want, and a short acting, weaker by mg/kg is it more profitable simply because users consume more of it, therefore you sell more of it, why selling something that is fully active at a certain dosage and lasts 4-6 hours when you can sell a sub par substance that you need double amount and last half the time?
No problem, at the end nothing changes really.Sorry for dismantling your post and picking it apart point by point, and while I applaud you for thinking about this topic critically and give you credit for applying what seems logical to you, I have to disagree with—respectfully of course—the majority of your points, as outlined in the rebuttals above.mooka said:
Every other theory comes after this, no matter how you put it, or if you like it or not.
Couldn't agree moreSee, I look at it more like: “FUCK GLOBAL DRUG PROHIBITION. Just let adults enjoy recreational drugs.”
Still, not a scientist but last my two cents:
science is not questionable, is based on data, when this data is not available hypotheses are made and are confirmed or disproved through experimentation and/or data acquisition.
We have all the data we need:
Meh appeared after shifting from natural to synthetic precursor
it follows that the difference is due to the precursor
now you have two different hypotheses:
- precursor impurities create active byproducts that compete with the main substance. Fine I can accept that, but as you said it needs proof.
So I go to drugsdata.org today (one of those public and anonymous substance test labs cited before, there are few but not dozens), and check the first 200 results for MDMA and the only results that gives a synthesis byproduct is https://www.drugsdata.org/view.php?id=11074.
All the others pills are tablets are MDMA, so where are those impurities that alter so much the substance effects? Are those all fantastic magic lovey sexy horney danceyoursoulout extasy pills? I doubt very much so
Something isn't right here, either those impurities aren't there or something else is going on.
On a side note, attempted purification of current available "Champagne" or "Cola" or whatever is called DWM MDMA doesn't produce any difference in effects.
Many people in and out this forum tried to purify MeH without success. Purifying in this case means by the bare minimum: pulverization of the substance, multiple acetone washes followed by multiple recrystallizations (at least 4times ) in IPA or other suitable solvent.
Now I'd like to quote you: "No, if the impurity were also an amine-bearing compound, recrystallization would simply also recrystallize the impurity." Actually this isn't correct, crystal lattice formation would favour the substance which is in higher concentration first, this is the whole point of recrystallization. It is a way to purify chemicals.
from wikipedia: "In chemistry, recrystallization is a technique used to purify chemicals. By dissolving both impurities and a compound in an appropriate solvent, either the desired compound or impurities can be removed from the solution, leaving the other behind. It is named for the crystals often formed when the compound precipitates out. "
There are better, more suitable purification techniques for this." Indeed. Have you tried any of those and succeed? just asking
Also: an amine bearing compound in relevant concentration would be detected by the above test labs. I'm tired to repeat this: if is there it is detected. There is not such substance invisible to GC/MS.
It is a fact, it's not questionable.
So that leaves us with:
- precursor is not what it should be.