What is wrong with the MDMA available today? - v2

[Psynaught]

Wow, that sucks; I"m sorry to hear that, but I'm glad you've found a good source.


Another difference: you were 40 years younger and still had baby neophyte brain cells and serotonin sites to exploit for rolling your tits off. As we age, our brains increasing put out more and more monoamine oxidase (MAO) gradually making us less and less receptive to the effects of drugs, generally requiring more than in the past, and featuring slowly diminishing returns unless serious tolerance breaks are taken and other health protocols are followed.

Or A/B test it. Find that Berkley Chem drop out and see if they'll whip you up a batch of the old recipe stuff for old time's sake, lol! Wouldn't that be cool?

Interesting. I did not know the chemist, my connection bought from him.

 

[PsychedelicSummer]

Yes absolutely, but you wont find much agreement in this thread as most discussion participants here choose* to believe that some thing is wrong with the molecule.. when it's actually their brains. They in denial, and it doesnt matter how much reason/evidence you provide them. Ive posted lab results here on multiple occasions which people just often outright ignore. Its sad, but people are going to believe what they WANT to believe

Like they think that years/decades of other drug use can't possibly alter their neurochemistry or something.

I'd buy that - if I hadn't shared my MehDMA with "emphatogen virgins" who've had the same lackluster experiences I've had.

If you compare officially available stories of MDMA tolerance and loss of magic, like Ann Shulgin and Lorenzo Hagerty, it isn't that magic suddenly disappears - unless after a massive overdose like in Lorenzos case. Today it's common for people to take 2-300 mg pills. In the beginning, pills were more like 50-100 mg and cost a lot more than today - and many had life changing experiences and the name Ecstasy came to for a reason. I had my first MDMA in 1987 - and I know what it should be like. And no, I've never abused or overdosed on any empathogen.

I see young "virgin" people believe they've taken real MDMA, when to me they don't show typical signs of MDMA-intoxication.

But OC, we're all free to believe what we want. But the only reality isn't just lab results, phenomenology and observable reality weights more heavily for me than a reagent test or sloppy, for profit, GC-MS testing.

 

[Observer01]

I'd buy that - if I hadn't shared my MehDMA with "emphatogen virgins" who've had the same lackluster experiences I've had.

If you compare officially available stories of MDMA tolerance and loss of magic, like Ann Shulgin and Lorenzo Hagerty, it isn't that magic suddenly disappears - unless after a massive overdose like in Lorenzos case. Today it's common for people to take 2-300 mg pills. In the beginning, pills were more like 50-100 mg and cost a lot more than today - and many had life changing experiences and the name Ecstasy came to for a reason. I had my first MDMA in 1987 - and I know what it should be like. And no, I've never abused or overdosed on any empathogen.

I see young "virgin" people believe they've taken real MDMA, when to me they don't show typical signs of MDMA-intoxication.

But OC, we're all free to believe what we want. But the only reality isn't just lab results, phenomenology and observable reality weights more heavily for me than a reagent test or sloppy, for profit, GC-MS testing.

I'll reiterate what someone else brought up.... I don't think we should undervalue the effect that our technologically focused environment has had on our brain chemistry. 1988 was a different world, and there was a lot less freely available dopamine hits around outside of actual drugs. Phones, websites, social media; we are constantly overflooded and bombarded with these mini "fixes". An experience like MDMA would have landed in a brain that was likely more receptive to novel experiences vs. today. Additionally, I would argue that people were naturally more socially connected to each other then, which is a great potentiator for something like MDMA. Today, we are quite socially separate in many ways. I think it's a solid theory.

 

[Didgital]

I'd buy that - if I hadn't shared my MehDMA with "emphatogen virgins" who've had the same lackluster experiences I've had.

If you compare officially available stories of MDMA tolerance and loss of magic, like Ann Shulgin and Lorenzo Hagerty, it isn't that magic suddenly disappears - unless after a massive overdose like in Lorenzos case. Today it's common for people to take 2-300 mg pills. In the beginning, pills were more like 50-100 mg and cost a lot more than today - and many had life changing experiences and the name Ecstasy came to for a reason. I had my first MDMA in 1987 - and I know what it should be like. And no, I've never abused or overdosed on any empathogen.

I see young "virgin" people believe they've taken real MDMA, when to me they don't show typical signs of MDMA-intoxication.

But OC, we're all free to believe what we want. But the only reality isn't just lab results, phenomenology and observable reality weights more heavily for me than a reagent test or sloppy, for profit, GC-MS testing.

I never said there wasn't sub-par MDMA out there in the world. What I've argued all along is that the vast majority of MDMA is actually good MDMA. The global availability of precursors has spread to every corner of the world. And these precursors go through the same exact intermediate that safrole does.

These days... i imagine the only meh-MDMA isn't MDMA at all, its a completely different and misrepresented substance. Because no one wants cut MDMA where I live. It's all stellar here.

If it's not stellar, its considered bunk, and doesn't make it through the distribution channels.

 

[Leprechaun]

What’s wrong with MDMA?

What do you mean? MDMA is purer, cheaper and more abundant than ever before.

It’s only a click away. Delivered to your door for gods sake… Since Darknetmarkets became available, quality mdma had never been easier to access.

At the end of the day, the real work, is what you need to do within the confines of your own heart, you only.

The rest you can let go, as it comes and goes like the wind, rain and sunshine…

 

[Didgital]

If you compare officially available stories of MDMA tolerance and loss of magic,

Where are these official stories btw???

Even from Ann herself (who I've met) this is anecdotal...

 

[Allylbenzene]

Here's a quote referencing Shulgins take on MDMA magic. I haven't read the whole thread so this might have been mentioned already.

You know how with mdma, you don't feel "the magic" unless both the S and L isomer are present together and ingested at the same time...either one ingested on it's own will not cause the magic according to Shulgin.

 

[PsychedelicSummer]

Where are these official stories btw???

Even from Ann herself (who I've met) this is anecdotal...

Psychedelic salon podcast.

 

[ageingpartyfiend]

I was party (heh) to viewing/participating in raves / free festivals in mid 80's to 2003 ish time when loads of people dropped ecstacy. I was on it too sometimes, othertimes not. We often crewed in some capacity and were also involved with soundsystems etc and knew a lot pf people on that scene...dj's, performers, musicians etc - still do.

I've also attended (and seen via video clips etc) plenty of similar events since, say, 2007 until quite recently and have close family and friends still heavily involved in that scene and its offshoots. Still loads of people of many ages taking ecstacy at said events

The energy, vibe and visual appearance of people at said gatherings is completely and totally different in the latter period when compared to the first one. I wonder why that could be? In both periods these groups of people have access to extremely pure mdma/ecstacy

Also the experience people report of taking mdma/ecstacy in the latter period is also completely and totally different (95% of the time anyway). Hardly anyone who consumes said drug in later times reports experience anywhere near to the earlier period. My kids (not kids...late 20's- late 30's) and their very tuned in and large friendship groups can't really relate to my generation's experience reports from the earlier period.

I wonder why that is?

 

[Biscuit]

Ok, so here goes.

For years I’ve been off and on researching and compiling scientific articles, comments and my own experiences in an attempt to answer this issue. I am not yet in position to provide my own definitive view on this, although my main theory concerning the cause of this issue and for which I still firmly believe, is contained throughout various posts in this and the earlier threads. The scientific reality is that until some analytical chemist decides to make this their PHD thesis, the answer chemically speaking will be out of reach.

But what I was told by my best friend today, and the context which makes what he said so compelling, must be shared with all of you immediately.

I am in my mid 40s, I have a science degree, I have a law degree, been an criminal lawyer for two decades, and I have been taking MDMA (whether pills or crystal) and methamphetamine continuously for 26 years. I have been a member of this site and contributed throughout this time (albeit fairly sporadically in more recent years) since December 1999 and my username and login has not changed. I have read every single post of every single page of this thread and its previous incarnations.

My best friend (who I have known for 27 years and who was my partner for nine of them) is the same age as me and this person has taken MDMA and methamphetamine this entire time too. From 1999 to 2009 we would have had all of the same pills and most of the same experiences. We have continued to take MDMA pills and crystal/powder and remain best friends to this day and have shared in many subsequent experiences since separating. My best friend has taken even more MDMA than I have, in fact way more, over the last 10 years. He has limited knowledge of this issue, no chemistry background and has no idea of the extensive discussion concerning it, that has been a feature of this forum and I am sure many others for years now.

Before posting what I wanted to share, I must state these matters from the outset:

1. No one who has said that meh-MDMA is a real thing and exists has ever said that all MDMA is meh; on the contrary.


2. Anyone who asserts that meh-MDMA is a real thing is saying that despite the massive doses in so many of the pills these days, when you got a pill in the earlier days that tested as MDXX and wasn’t a total fake (speed, Ket, chalk, etc), then provided the dose of MDMA in that pill was high enough (and back then then dose per pill was 50mg to 150mg at best and I know this due to many years of having been privy to the results of forensic laboratory tests for seized illicit substances and seeing the certificates with my own eyes since 2001), the experience was close to textbook, physical effects like mydriasis could not be hidden, the experiences were amazing, and indeed often life changing. You were buckled, looked buckled and literally needed to buckle up for the next few hours.


3. Anyone who asserts that meh-MDMA is a real thing and cannot be explained by more subjective factors is asserting that there is something chemically different about what they are consuming - either it is:

- not MDMA, despite test results stating to the contrary, including government forensic laboratory results which must be exact to be able of sustain a prosecution relating to MDMA as opposed to some other similar chemical;

- that the MDMA contains a greater proportion of the R enantiomer of MDMA as opposed to the S and is not racemic as it always was; or

- (this being my personal view) that much of the MDMA consumed today - illicitly produced and packaged as it is and requiring no purification at any of the steps of production along the way - being manufactured from different precursors (or let’s be clear pre-precursors) and using different reductive animation methods than MDMA produced in those earlier days, contains some type of impurity or impurities or combination of impurities, perhaps within the umbrella of a “impurity family”, all of which have the capability of muting/shortening/ruining the true MDMA experience to varying extents; much like SSRIs have the capability to do by blocking the monoamine transporters especially the SERT, so the MDMA molecule cannot enter into the axon of the nerve cell to work its magic.


4. It is accepted by most of those with sufficient knowledge advocating for the existence of the meh-MDMA phenomenon, that:

- pure MDMA-HCl is the same as any other PURE MDMA-HCl regardless of how it is made but we aren’t dealing with laboratories making pure illicit anything;

- pure 3,4-MDP2P can of course be made from any of the pre-precursors that are invariably what is currently being used to manufacture MDXX substances these days no matter which pre-precursor is being used, provided that those that are doing so purify the magical ketone first (so remove what is cleaved off from what is a far more complicated, likely chiral, and frankly “messy” molecule than the more simple safrole or piperonyl precursor that previously the chemist built upon to make the ketone);

- potential “one-pot” or “one-high pressure vessel” reactions which go simply and cheaply from some random chiral pre-precursor (whether used as the racemate or goodness me as an enantomerically pure version) to the desired amine, without any purification steps beyond extraction of crude MDMA freebase and everything else created due to other reactants having happily gone along for the same ride, before creating the hydrochloride, would likely exacerbate this problem.


5. That continuous anecdotal evidence as to the purple/black vs grey/black colour difference when testing pills or crystal, something I can personally attest to after using marquis reagent for 26 years, being that prior to any meh-MDMA, good MDMA pills tested with fresh marquis reagent went dark purple to black, but in more recent times so many of the pills or powder have gone very dark grey (some almost dark brown) to black and never any purple, and almost as night follows day the MDMA experience for the non-purple reactions is almost always meh-MDMA.


6. In the pictures below, the two pills were tested with the same marquis reagent, one after the other - the difference is striking - putting aside any impact of the dye used in the pills to one side, and assuming a similar binder in each, which given both have the “NL” branding press isn’t that far fetched, the only, THE ONLY, scientific explanation for this colour difference is that the makeup of the Onlyfans tablets on the right (that is THE TABLET which includes the illicitly produced impure MDMA-HCl mixture that went into producing the tablet, as opposed to the milligram amount of “pure MDMA-HCl” of the actual molecule quoted in a laboratory test and without reference to any other substance within) is different to the make up of the SoundCloud tablets on the left and the illicitly produced MDMA-HCl mixture that went into that tablet.


7. I was with this same ex-partner/best friend partying for four days straight only ten days earlier at the best event of our lives, where we consumed Pink Punishers and MDMA crystal and whilst both were decent, it was still of the meh kind, with many doses needing to be had and oh yes, I personally tested the Punisher and the MDMA with the EXACT SAME BOTTLE of marquis reagent as that used to test the pills in the picture below and both samples reacted exactly like the pill on the left did, no purple, straight to black through a very dark grey initial colour


8. My friend was communicating on a group chat to a mutual friend independently of any conscious thought as to this phenomenon; he said what he said without regard to any of this discussion, to Bluelight, to science or even to the purple result, so placebo can be ruled out. This experience was a mere ten nights after the last lot of MDMA pills, this person’s experience being vast and their tolerance utterly extreme.

Given what I know about the person who sent the message and the context in which it was sent, as corroborated by the starkest of differences in the chemical properties of each substance (admittedly fairly non-specific and with the significance of the colour change also deeply rooted in, and derived from, anecdotal experiences), this is about as compelling as far as user based evidence of the existence of meh-MDMA as one could ever get.

The reality of Meh-MDMA is a fact.

Meh-MDMA is part of the illicit supply of MDMA pills and powders to varying extents all over the world, with no doubt some localities fortunate enough to barely encounter it at all, whereas others might encounter it 90% of the time.

The fact of its existence in the world’s MDMA supply to varying extents cannot be summarily dismissed by the robotic trotting out of “advanced age”, “tolerance”, “set and settling” or “the distinct absence of yellow smiley faces” etc, etc, as sensible explanations.

All else being equal, the differences must be chemical.

• Is it one particular chemical that is responsible; likely not.
• Is it a group of chemicals with the pharmacological capability, at perhaps very low doses, of inhibiting MDMA’s ability to release that special blend of monoamine neurotransmitters, especially serotonin; maybe.
• If this is correct, then does this account for the seemingly subpar quality of modern day mass produced P2P methamphetamine, basically manufactured in the same way but just with different pre-precursors to start with that do not have the methylenedioxy bridge (and tartaric acid resolution to increase the D isomer %), despite us all being told that methamphetamine has supposedly never been so pure and never been so potent, in a similar way to us being told that MDMA pills have never been so pure and dosed so high; I say undoubtedly.

I don’t profess to have all the answers and it frustrates the shit out of me. But no one can tell me, someone of my experience and knowledge (derived from multiple bases as it has for over two and a half decades), that meh-MDMA, as I’ve explained it, is not a real thing; nor do I subscribe to the defeatist attitude that it is something that is just impossible to scientifically investigate and can never be explained.


Ok, I’ll hand over to the naysayers now. I can only hope that those who will inevitably chime in will actually have something constructive to say that they haven’t already said a hundred times already…

Biscuit out.

 

[Deleted member 554582]

relating to 90-ies it's not feel like mdma at all.....idk what is it

 

[Allylbenzene]

Source of Meh-MDMA?
Dated May 1st 2025.

So I recently discovered that a MASSIVE (close to 100 ts) amount of 'PMK' has been sold by various vendors to the public market. None of these vendors have been willing to disclose the CAS number of the product.
Upon many discussions and testing we have found that (at least one of the vendors) has sold tons of the following chemical as their 'PMK':
3,4-Dimethoxyphenylacetone ethyl glycidate.

This is gonna be a huge problem for the future of MDMA availability, because I guarantee that very few people are going do the ring closure.
...
I do know 3,4 dimethoxyphenylacetone is out there, I haven't gotta good quote yet, as I keep getting generic 1usd/MT responses, but I know it's out there.
...
> What analysis was done to positively identify the compound in question?

It was spilled beans by the supplier

Someone needs to test pure 3,4-dimethoxy-methamphetamine with marquis, froehde and mecke reagents and share the results.
CAS: 70932-18-2

3,4-Dimethoxy-N-methylamphetamine (DMMA) is a psychoactive drug and research chemical of the phenethylamine and amphetamine chemical classes.
It appears to act as a serotonin–norepinephrine–dopamine releasing agent (SNDRA), although it is significantly less potent than MDMA.

 

[Rectify]

No wonder the pills suck then.

 

[unodelacosa]

until some analytical chemist decides to make this their PHD thesis, the answer chemically speaking will be out of reach.

Yeah except we're dealing with anecdotal reports of pills & powder from yesteryear, many/most—possibly all—of which are no longer around to test. We have today's product of course, but does it even matter? Fake, bunk, and counterfeit MDMA has been around since at least the 90s. And the answer to everyone's curiosity about MDMA quality will never be fully satiated, even if some young researcher gets the approval to do their PhD thesis on uncovering something that is not important enough to be attached to a financial incentive re: would-be MDMA synthesis, or deliberate substitution, or take your pick, bc what causes one person to say, "this is mehDMA," will be different from other causes for other people. As we've established, many things can cause suboptimal "MDMA" or "MDMA-like" experiences. The term "meh-DMA" is neither precise nor technical.

But what I was told by my best friend today, and the context which makes what he said so compelling, must be shared with all of you immediately.

Forgive me, but I'm already dubious and expecting this will be continued anecdotal evidence.

I am in my mid 40s,

Same. Been doing drugs the same amount of time, and even used to manufacture MDMA around the turn of the century. If you lived on the east coast of the U.S., there's a good chance we did the same drugs, from Star Wars blotter and Lenny Pickard's liquid LSD to white Mitsubishis and Red Omega presses, "tic-tacs" and "disco biscuits" to "shwag" weed, reggie miller, red lob, etc., etc.

I have a science degree,

Chemistry though?

I have a law degree, been an criminal lawyer for two decades,

Respect

and I have been taking MDMA (whether pills or crystal) and methamphetamine continuously for 26 years. I have been a member of this site and contributed throughout this time (albeit fairly sporadically in more recent years) since December 1999 and my username and login has not changed.

Were you ever a Hive Bee? How about the ADC newsgroup? I'm only asking outta curiosity since we're so close in age, not implying anything if you are or are not familiar with what I'm talking about.

I have read every single post of every single page of this thread and its previous incarnations.

Same.

My best friend (who I have known for 27 years and who was my partner for nine of them) is the same age as me and this person has taken MDMA and methamphetamine this entire time too. From 1999 to 2009 we would have had all of the same pills and most of the same experiences. We have continued to take MDMA pills and crystal/powder and remain best friends to this day and have shared in many subsequent experiences since separating. My best friend has taken even more MDMA than I have, in fact way more, over the last 10 years. He has limited knowledge of this issue, no chemistry background and has no idea of the extensive discussion concerning it, that has been a feature of this forum and I am sure many others for years now.

I know where you're going with this and I understand why it's so compelling to you, specifically, but it's not any new evidence we don't already know about with regards to anecdotal experiences sometimes being the same, and sometimes not. It does not mean any new conclusions can be drawn from this subjective experience.

Before posting what I wanted to share, I must state these matters from the outset:

1. No one who has said that meh-MDMA is a real thing and exists has ever said that all MDMA is meh; on the contrary.

No, it's been asserted by a few ppl on here that they don't believe "real MDMA" exists anywhere anymore. You may have noticed my username a few times throughout this thread. I've argued directly against these assertions, yet they persist and ultimately ppl will believe what they want to believe, evidence be damned. So I dialed back the amount with which I care to argue about it, present comment notwithstanding.

2. Anyone who asserts that meh-MDMA is a real thing is saying that despite the massive doses in so many of the pills these days, when you got a pill in the earlier days that tested as MDXX and wasn’t a total fake (speed, Ket, chalk, etc), then provided the dose of MDMA in that pill was high enough (and back then then dose per pill was 50mg to 150mg at best and I know this due to many years of having been privy to the results of forensic laboratory tests for seized illicit substances and seeing the certificates with my own eyes since 2001), the experience was close to textbook, physical effects like mydriasis could not be hidden, the experiences were amazing, and indeed often life changing. You were buckled, looked buckled and literally needed to buckle up for the next few hours.

Can you prove this, or do you expect ppl to take other ppl's word for it such as your own and your homie? See, it really falls apart here. I believe you, especially the part about having performed forensic tests to establish per-dose amounts, but the term "buckled" isn't the medically precise terminology needed here, though as a slang term, I'm a fan… And it isn't like samples from the 1990's are still verifiably accessible.

3. Anyone who asserts that meh-MDMA is a real thing and cannot be explained by more subjective factors is asserting that there is something chemically different about what they are consuming - either it is:

- not MDMA, despite test results stating to the contrary, including government forensic laboratory results which must be exact to be able of sustain a prosecution relating to MDMA as opposed to some other similar chemical;

- that the MDMA contains a greater proportion of the R enantiomer of MDMA as opposed to the S and is not racemic as it always was; or

This has been covered already and there's zero evidence to suggest anything other than racemic MDMA is on the streets with very few exceptions.

- (this being my personal view) that much of the MDMA consumed today - illicitly produced and packaged as it is and requiring no purification at any of the steps of production along the way

What do you mean "requiring no purification at any of the steps of production along the way"? This is not realistic for any known syntheses of MDMA I've ever heard of, never mind the fact that things like extraction and crystallization are themselves purification techniques without which the synthesis would fail and/or the end product will be too impure and toxic to sell, buy or use.

- being manufactured from different precursors (or let’s be clear pre-precursors)

This is not a term we use in chemistry. There's the precursor, the final product, and any number of intermediates products between the two. For instance, starting from the precursor, Safrole, an MDMA synthesis might go:

Safrole (allylbenzene precursor) → Isosafrole (intermediate) → MDP-2-P (intermediate ketone) → MDMA and then onto crystallization, acetone rinse and recrystallization.

This is not unusual, and it's similarly not uncommon for multi-step procedures to be performed in legitimate industry as well.

and using different reductive animation methods

I'm guessing this is a type and you know this next part, but for anyone reading along… So it's "reductive amination" because it's reducing (removing) an oxygen atom and replacing it with an "amine" (NH₃). Reductive animation might be a stick figure cartoon…

than MDMA produced in those earlier days, contains some type of impurity or impurities or combination of impurities, perhaps within the umbrella of a “impurity family”, all of which have the capability of muting/shortening/ruining the true MDMA experience to varying extents; much like SSRIs have the capability to do by blocking the monoamine transporters especially the SERT, so the MDMA molecule cannot enter into the axon of the nerve cell to work its magic.

In the case of MDDMA and MDTMA—two byproducts from MDMA synthesis performed with impure methylamine containing dimethylamine and trimethylamine—this could be the case maybe, but it's unclear if, when, how often and prevalent this is. My best guess is that it's not but so common. For that matter though, MDMA itself begins to blockade its own activity, itself being a mild to moderate serotonin reuptake inhibitor. This is why, in a single session, subsequent doses are much less effective than the initial dose.

advocating for the existence of the meh-MDMA phenomenon

Think about that wording for a second. Either something exists or it doesn't, when discussing concrete real world objects. Someone might advocate for certain gun laws, for example, but no one "advocates" for the existence of coconut inebriation. You can advocate as hard as you want for it, but coconuts still will not ever get you high no matter how many ppl agree that it's time to trip balls on some coconut water. Similarly there's no advocating for the existence of meh-DMA. The phenomenon, as reported, surely exists, as much as placebo effect is very much a real phenomenon (not saying mehDMA is placebo, just that I'm not invalidating ppl's subjective experiences; I'm just arguing that the cause is unknown and most likely unknowable without refining some definitions and using more precise terminology to describe things. I know that seems like I'm arguing semantics, but words matter in that they affect perception in various ways through shades of meaning and the sort. I know you know this if you're a lawyer.

- pure MDMA-HCl is the same as any other PURE MDMA-HCl regardless of how it is made but we aren’t dealing with laboratories making pure illicit anything;

That's not true, check your facts. While many street drugs are lower than pharmaceutical-grade purity, this isn't always the case, and pharmaceutical products also wind up in the black market sometimes. Moreover, there are some very talented clandestine chemists out there who indeed produce such quality LSD, MDMA, and other staples of the drug panoply.

- pure 3,4-MDP2P can of course be made from any of the pre-precursors that are invariably what is currently being used to manufacture MDXX substances these days no matter which pre-precursor is being used,

Again, this is not the put-down that you think it is, and it doesn't strengthen your argument like you think, either.

provided that those that are doing so purify the magical ketone first (so remove what is cleaved off from what is a far more complicated, likely chiral, and frankly “messy” molecule than the more simple safrole or piperonyl precursor that previously the chemist built upon to make the ketone);

There's a lot wrong in this statement, my guy. Firstly, the ketone, MDP-2-P, aka: PMK, is in fact not chiral, and I'm not sure why you think it's more complicated and "messy" compared to safrole/isosafrole. Just because you're intelligent in other fields doesn't mean these giant leaps in logic are sound or accurate.

There's a lot that you say after this that builds on your incorrect assumption that MDP-2-P is chiral (again: it is not), and it would be tedious for everyone involved to call out each of these instances, so we're skipping some stuff here.

The reality of Meh-MDMA is a fact.

That's a weird statement, as there's not much reason to add "meh-DMA" (or my variation on it: "MDM-meh") to the drug lexicon as any rigorous, specific and serious medical / scientific term. It's imprecise and sits as more of an umbrella term for "lackluster drug experiences when one was expecting a full-on MDMA roll." I don't think anyone is seriously claiming that lackluster responses and disappointing experiences when trying to use ecstasy occur sometimes for various reasons. So boldface statements that this phenomenon sometimes happens are not needed and they reflect a misunderstanding of arguments contending that reports of supposed wide-spread "meh-DMA" are exaggerated almost to the point of becoming myth. (Notice I said "almost", guys, before anyone jumps down my throat. I know you had a bad time taking MDMA before. Not saying you didn't. But keep in mind: there are millions and millions of drug users all over the world… what happens in your neck of the woods is not universal to the globe.)

Meh-MDMA is part of the illicit supply of MDMA pills and powders to varying extents all over the world, with no doubt some localities fortunate enough to barely encounter it at all, whereas others might encounter it 90% of the time.

The fact of its existence in the world’s MDMA supply to varying extents cannot be summarily dismissed by the robotic trotting out of “advanced age”, “tolerance”, “set and settling” or “the distinct absence of yellow smiley faces” etc, etc, as sensible explanations.

Again – when this happens, in some instances it's the pill/powder, and in other instances it's the person, or it's a competing medication, or any number of different factors that have been covered on this thread.

All else being equal, the differences must be chemical.

Now if all else were actually equal, that would be sweet. This is not the world we live in though.

Is it one particular chemical that is responsible; likely not.

QED

Is it a group of chemicals with the pharmacological capability, at perhaps very low doses, of inhibiting MDMA’s ability to release that special blend of monoamine neurotransmitters, especially serotonin; maybe.

Likely not.

If this is correct, then does this account for the seemingly subpar quality of modern day mass produced P2P methamphetamine, basically manufactured in the same way but just with different pre-precursors to start with that do not have the methylenedioxy bridge (and tartaric acid resolution to increase the D isomer %), despite us all being told that methamphetamine has supposedly never been so pure and never been so potent, in a similar way to us being told that MDMA pills have never been so pure and dosed so high; I say undoubtedly.

So what you're talking about is first producing P-2-P (phenyl-2-propanone, aka: phenylacetone, aka: benzyl methyl ketone (BMK)), from a starting precursor of something like benzaldehyde, and no that doesn't mean it's some janky move or some crazy amount of extra effort. Then the P-2-P is reduced to racemic methamphetamine in an analogous manner to how MDMA is produced. Since there's no 3,4-methylenedioxy ring present, there are fewer side-product possibilities, FWIW, but no, generally these are two different things being discussed here. You see, the two isomers of racemic methamphetamine are separated using tartaric acid and the unwanted l-isomer is converted into a new portion of racemic meth. This can then be separated again and the process repeated as desired. The purity drives upward with each iteration, so like: 50%, then 75%, then 87.5%, then 93.75%, etc, in theory at least. In practice it's not quite as precise and high-yielding, but you get the picture. Most common meth cuts these days are l-isomer meth or unconverted pseudoephedrine at times when it's produced via reduction of ephedrine/pseudo.

I don’t profess to have all the answers and it frustrates the shit out of me.

I'm sorry to hear you're so frustrated.

But no one can tell me, someone of my experience and knowledge (derived from multiple bases as it has for over two and a half decades), that meh-MDMA, as I’ve explained it, is not a real thing; nor do I subscribe to the defeatist attitude that it is something that is just impossible to scientifically investigate and can never be explained.

It's not defeatist; it's just a fact, unless you can build a time machine to go back and test out the products of yesteryear, this is one of those things in life that we can only guess at and which do no matter any longer as it's in the past and untestable. That's not an opinion in and of itself. Each guess is an opinion, but none of them are verifiable truths.

Ok, I’ll hand over to the naysayers now. I can only hope that those who will inevitably chime in will actually have something constructive to say that they haven’t already said a hundred times already…

Don't I wish. I've been steadfast on my points, and if people take the time to understand what I'm saying, they'll realize that this is a non-issue. No one is arguing what you seem to think they're arguing (i.e.: no one's questioning that these subjective experiences occur, or that impurities exist, or that all products labelled "MDMA" are the same. And it isn't "naysaying"; it's about clarity, using precise definitions, and understanding better the pharmacodynamics involved in MDMA use and how it impacts qualitative experience.

 

[unodelacosa]

Source of Meh-MDMA? Dated May 1st 2025.

Someone needs to test pure 3,4-dimethoxy-methamphetamine with marquis, froehde and mecke reagents and share the results.
CAS: 70932-18-2

I agree, and I've mentioned the reporting of 3,4-dimethoxy species a couple times in this thread, I think. MDMA syntheses often isomerize safrole to isosafrole, but overheating can crack the ring, creating tan-colored (anecdotally, not confirmed) dimethoxy byproducts. However, some methods like Wacker oxidation skip isomerization entirely, and not every clandestine operator is inept enough to bumble into ring cleavage like this. So this is one of many factors that can alter the end product composite with some batches of illicit "MDMA".

 

[Generation *DMT*]

What about an MDMA tax?would that speed decriminalization?

 

[sHR00m]

relating to 90-ies it's not feel like mdma at all.....idk what is it

I wouldn't be surprised if (lack of drug checking aside) MDMAs neurotoxicity might be the reason why MDMA "did hit differently" in the 90s. MDMA affects me differently too than it did in 2000 but I would not blame this on the substance but on excessive usage in the past. In fact it barely hits me at normal dose levels unless a long break (months, years) has been taken. For me this pattern is consistent with a neurotoxic substance that burns away the very synapses it needs for its action as well as the very slow recovery time until I can feel it again which might be due to neurogenesis.

 

[Allylbenzene]

I wouldn't be surprised if (lack of drug checking aside) MDMAs neurotoxicity might be the reason why MDMA "did hit differently" in the 90s. MDMA affects me differently too than it did in 2000 but I would not blame this on the substance but on excessive usage in the past. In fact it barely hits me at normal dose levels unless a long break (months, years) has been taken. For me this pattern is consistent with a neurotoxic substance that burns away the very synapses it needs for its action as well as the very slow recovery time until I can feel it again which might be due to neurogenesis.

The other angle is personal biochemistry influencing how MDMA feels. The cause might not be related to "MDMA neurotoxicity" but the changing condition of your body's fundamental metabolic systerm that governs everything.

Anything that damages the mitochondria affects the production of energy and the production of protective steroid hormones. Both energy and steroids are needed to handle stress adaptively. A high rate of energy metabolism and continous stream of steroid production is a facet of youthfulness and good health. The opposite occurs in aging and disease.

 

[4DQSAR]

What I noted wass that in 1988 a Dove (also known as 'Sitting Duck') cost £20 BUT it was 125mg of MDMA every single time. There was NO competing manufacturer so they could charge a huge premium since buyers had just two options - Doves or nowt.

By the early 1990s we saw two or three different stamps and the price dropped to £10 per but you could still be almost certain that what you got would be a 125mg pill. Most retailers were also users who were at the same club or at the same free party sooooo..... if they attempted a rip-off, they were there to be given a quiet word. Never happened to me but one poor guy had to pay back £300 i.e. 30 pills to the unhappy punters. Why pay back? Becase that dealer was a 'face' and if they wanted to continue in business with his nice group of Smokies (Smokescreen Sound System) then they had to.

In short, quality was policed by users.

By the mid 90s quality was on the way down and by 2000, a pill would likely contain about 75mg of MDMA bulked out with a pinch of speed. The price was low so people were simply 'double dropping' which if you stop and think about it, is almost certain to end badly for someone. Again, never got burned but got to watch a bunch of retailers capping up a mixture of speed and acid to be sold AS MDMA. Just for a 'laugh' one of them put three microdots into a cap, proudly held it up and giggled 'someone is in for a bad night'.

So I lost what little faith I ever had in street drugs. It didn't really affect me, but cocaine, ketamine and other stuff all began to appear and that beutiful moment was GONE. Either you were 'One Foot in the Rave in 88 or you arrived too late. I was 19 at the time and I loved it all.

Almost 100% of the deaths associated with Ecstacy were in truth because MDMA was a class A drug just like heroin and cocaine. So dealers took one look and worked out that heck, the pill business waasn't the gold mine it once was so sell any old shite as MDMA and used their connections to smuggle something more profitable.

 

[sHR00m]

The other angle is personal biochemistry influencing how MDMA feels. The cause might not be related to "MDMA neurotoxicity" but the changing condition of your body's fundamental metabolic systerm that governs everything.

Sure there are various possible angles at play here. Also the tendency that latter drug experiences often aren't "as good" as the first times. Or nostalgia. There is a thread somewhere on here asserting that legal weed isn't as good as "the real thing" back when it was illegal as well.

What points me to neurotoxicity is that MDMA seems to be kinda famous for losing its magic rather quickly, especially if you do it excessively. For me this behavior resulted (among other things) in "perma-tolerance". I wasn't able to feel "MDMAs" effects unless I dosed well above 200mg. I therefore stopped doing MDMA, checking back in every few years if my "tolerance" improved. It took me a good decade of (largely) abstinence until I got a decent experience out of MDMA again at dosages below 200mg. Now its certainly possible that there is a different mechanism at play here but such a long recovery time could possibly indicate that neurogenesis was necessary here.