• BASIC DRUG
    DISCUSSION
    Welcome to Bluelight!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Benzo Chart Opioids Chart
    Drug Terms Need Help??
    Drugs 101 Brain & Addiction
    Tired of your habit? Struggling to cope?
    Want to regain control or get sober?
    Visit our Recovery Support Forums
  • BDD Moderators: Keif’ Richards | negrogesic

Meth What is "Super Meth" ?

MedicinalUser247

MedicinalUser247

Bluelighter
Joined
Aug 2, 2023
Messages
1,974
You know... I was just thinking about something. What is "Super Meth" ? There's actually several forms of "Super Meth". One form is changing the Phenylpropan-2-amine and replacing it with Phenyl-2-propanone. The other is adding two extra methyls as in 3,4-Dimethylmethamphetamine. Which creates another form of Methamphetamine. There's so many combinations of analogs out there it's impossible to say what "Super Meth" really is. All I can say is that you should test what your buying because you have no idea what your getting, unless you know how to make it yourself. Don't get me wrong I used to take ton's of risks. So, what's your interpretation of what "Super Meth" is ?
 
Man, like i've been saying with all of your posts, you'd be better off reading some basic texts on chemistry than asking questions like this on bluelight.
There's actually several forms of "Super Meth". One form is changing the Phenylpropan-2-amine and replacing it with Phenyl-2-propanone.
Click to expand...

^^^See in above, to put it politely, you don't know what the fuck you're talking about. You don't even phrase it as a question, you state it definitively, as if you are stating facts, "There's actually several forms of "Super Meth". One form is changing the Phenylpropan-2-amine and replacing it with Phenyl-2-propanone."

But what you said makes no sense and is far from a fact. You don't understand chemistry.

Phenylpropan-2-amine is one way of naming amphetamine, which refers to a phenyl ring connected to a propane chain, where the amine is attached to the second carbon of the propane chain, thus the name "propan-2-amine."

Whereas phenyl-2-propanone is P2P, a precursor to methamphetamine, named as such since there is a phenyl group attached to the second (2) carbon of a propanone (acetone).

So no one is replacing anything, they are two entirely different things.

Honestly dude these questions are getting kind of annoying, you're asking questions that require some basic understanding of chemistry, and in some you are even proposing "new" molecules based on some sort of understanding which you don't have (even being argumentative about it in some cases). Find some basic chemistry and then early level o-chem books then ask these kinds of questions intelligently. At a certain point these questions don't become questions anymore but a form of spam.

Add to that, you go around the forum giving people bad advice in threads (like the one thread which involved a drug interaction and you said something like, "It's fine, don't worry about it"). Also, to some naive person, they might take the image of a chemical structure in your profile as meaning you're generally knowledgeable and someone to take seriously (because to the poster your profile photo signals that if you're bright enough to understand chemistry, then your advice is sound). But that isn't the case, on both counts.

And there is no "supermeth". This is a shock term invented by the media. The phenomenon we are experiencing isnt because there is some sort of super meth floating. The phenomenon we are experiencing is vast amounts of dirty cheap meth on the market, far cheaper than it has ever been (costs less than weed), which allows people to regularly consume huge amounts at very low cost.

You're welcome posting on bluelight, but there becomes a point where you're just spamming the forum with inane questions
 
ru112904II00086409a329c99cb3e433665ad5231e933.jpg
 
"Super Meth" is actually called "Smeth"
It makes you bigger,faster, stronger, and smarter.
I obviously have NOT been able to do any, but I heard about it
 
Ugh...... People keep replying to this stupid thread. Just lock it this whole thing is just annoying me.
 
"Super meth" is a term invented by an alleged journalist named Sam Quinones; who in my humble opinion is a total hack fraud with a bizarre angle of creating a narrative around meth and fentanyl: romanticizing of harmful addictive substances of the past being ruined by modern synthetic drugs. Fuckin kids these days, am I right?

Anyways I'm not going to link his trash piece in The Atlantic, or his other trash piece in an LA based magazine. Instead I will sum it up, he claims based on interviews with homeless meth users on Skid Row that modern meth is different. We've heard this shit before although it was referred to as "sleepy dope". But Quinones suggests this meth made by what he claims is a brand spankin new synthesis of methamphetamine using a synthetic chemical called phenylacetone or phenyl-2-propanone and subjected to reductive animation. Sam suggests based on literally nothing that P2P meth which he continues to refer to as "new" reduces users to secondary psychosis and societal hatred, violence, and debauchery nearly instantly unlike the old good party drug meth synthed from all natural plant alkaloids. P2P makes METH ZOMBIES. Hell yeah, America loves a good "drug of the week" turns folks into zombies narrative. Lets fucking GO. (This in fact was meths very first clandestine form before becoming "crystal meth". Essentially both substances are methamphetamine hydrochloride, but bikers didn't bother to make shards of meth as smoking crystaline hydrochloride salts wasn't even conceivable at the time. And yes, there is no evidence that one could not form large crystals from a racemic blend. The Hells Angels simply just didn't, probably due in part that nobody in the clandestine world expected the stabilized salt to be smokable. In the 60s and 70s you snorted or shot speed (Interesting again, once abuse proof methods of OTC meth inhalers began being used to deter folks from extracting meth similar to modern day propylhexedrine, users found that the freebase meth soaked papers in the inhalers remained active when injected). Later methamphetamine hydrochloride began being vaporized in pipes in Hawaii. I can elaborate on why methamphetamine is able to be smoked as a stabilized salt where other compounds like cocaine must be brought to their "freebase" state.)

So Sam Quinones just doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. Neither do I, but I did some Googling, checked out books from my library, and made sure I had my history straight before putting pen to the paper. Anyways what Sam fails to mention is that modern methamphetamine is treated with a process the bikers either didn't have the care or freedom of law enforcement presence the cartel does to take the racemic yield of reductive animation, and purify it into 90% or more pure dextromethamphetamine, the more potent isomer of meth. (L-meth does basically nothing when paired with meth. L-meth is SLIGHTLY more selective of norepinephrine than D-meth, and has very much less affinity for dopamine than D-meth. But when paired together they both do in fact increase synaptic cleft concentrations of monoamines; dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine. Trace amounts of L-meth don't destabilize the subjective high of D-meth.)

Anyways, methamphetamine is kindof "super" in the sense that it is purer than ever, available for dirt cheap- the lowest street prices ever, and in MASSIVE quantities than a bunch of competing and inconsistent individual domestic chemists could not be capable of. This is entirely why users have negative subjective effects.

They're just overdosing on meth everytime they use it. They hit the bowl like it's weed and then panic fap for 20 hours before their body fails and forces sleep. Or worst case users develop symptoms of rhabdo.

Sam basically admits this in an interview when an almost responsible journalist pokes the same holes in his story. Nothing about modern meth is "new" or "different" chemically. D-meth is D-meth- whether your tweaker friends smurf up some cough pills and cook in a barn, or the cartel synths it through artificial means. It's just stronger, more available, and spreading WILDLY as amphetamine based stimulants are under a fucking shortage post COVID. New ADHD patients diagnosed by telehealth doctors, stupidly repeating the opioid epidemic catalyts, and now folks are discovering that meth is suddenly everywhere again.

Can't tell you how many fools on Reddit have now gotten their start on meth use as a substitute for their prescription stimulants.

I mean I did.

(My favorite part of the article is when Sam opines seemingly with sadness and regret that ALL NATURAL organic drugs like heroin and fucking pseudometh have been replaced by scary synthetics.

However more seriously his article only deepers the gap between the homeless- users of meth- and the rest of society that could have intercepted and re-routed them before it was too late. Fuck that guy.)
 
Last edited:
MedicinalUser247 said:
Ugh...... People keep replying to this stupid thread. Just lock it this whole thing is just annoying me.
Click to expand...
Hi OP. Above is an in detail explanation of "super meth" and where that term comes from.

Super meth is a very old meth synthesis (and a synth Walter White utilizes to create his famous blue tinted meth in "Breaking Bad" around the same time the DEA first detected the swap from racemic samples to pure d-meth crossing the border) and then is purified into the most potent product the country has seen with disturbing consistency. Meth users simply are overdosing and fucking up their brain stability quicker. In the heat of these desert environments neurotoxic cascades are drastically more severe, leading to favorable monoamine imbalances to induce psychosis.

But it isn't doing anything that less pure meth of that past was unable to do alone. It just does it faster. Once I learned this and took dosing nice and slow, my recreational use of meth was far far more enjoyable.

Hope that helps. Sorry people are just exhausted of the narrative that meth of today is novel or mysterious in some way. But figured you deserve a truthful explanation.
 
Last edited:
Methamphetanonymous said:
L-meth does basically nothing when paired with meth. L-meth is SLIGHTLY more selective of norepinephrine than D-meth, and has very much less affinity for dopamine than D-meth. But when paired together they both do in fact increase synaptic cleft concentrations of monoamines; dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine.
Click to expand...

L-meth isn't slightly more selective for NE than d-meth. It is tremendously more selective for NE, by an order of magnitude.

Make no mistake, 90:10 d-meth:l-meth is a potent, highly abusable stimulant. Functionally speaking, it isnt much different than d-meth. What makes it more likely to produce psychosis than the old pseudoephedrine based d-meth isn't so much pharmacodynamic differences but a function of economics: this new cartel meth is a fraction of the price, so users can take more, and sustain high dose daily habits far easier. That is what Sam Quinones missed. Instead he invented the P2P meth boogeyman.

Methamphetanonymous said:
Trace amounts of L-meth don't destabilize the subjective high of D-meth.
Click to expand...

It doesn't destabilize it, but it definitely does alter it. For those who have tried enantiomerically pure, pseudoephedrine based crystal meth, the difference is quite notable.

Beyond pharmacodymanics, probably of greater importance is that pharmacokinetically, l-methamphetamine, even at fairly low proportions, competes for absorption, distribution, and metabolic pathways, which can lower the effective concentration of d-methamphetamine in the brain, especially the all important time pharmacokinetic figure of time to peak plasma (which is a major component in the rewarding effect). The ultimate result is that the dopaminergic activity is not as pronounced as it would be with pure d-methamphetamine.

Also both enantiomers are metabolized by similar enzymatic pathways, so the presence of l-methamphetamine will slightly inhibit metabolism of d-methamphetamine due to competition for these enzymes, making it last a bit longer (similar to adderall, whereby l-amp alters d-amp pharmacokinetics compared to dextromethamphetamine alone). I suppose one could argue this could increase the risk of psychosis and neurotoxicity, but I'd say the difference is minor. The bigger difference is the high.

So in a sense, this new meth is slightly less reinforcing than pure d-meth. I know a long-term tweaker who actually quit because he didn't like the high of this stuff. For a new user smoking this new meth versus enantiomerically pure d-meth, they might be less impressed.

I remember trying this new breed of meth for the first time, when smoked i thought, "damn this stuff is not so great". Orally however, it is quite similar. This is because of the pharmacokinetic issue is more evened out.

So yeah, I agree Sam Quinones got it wrong about the P2P derived meth being somehow more toxic or addictive than pseudoephedrine based meth. But l-meth makes a difference. Intravenously it is probably is a bit worse for you given the potent local vasoconstriction that l-meth causes, and might be slightly more psychosis inducing since it hangs around longer, but the main reason people are losing their shit on it is is because how dirt cheap it has become, and how widely available it is.

I'm not a fan of meth, even the best d-meth, but there is a difference with this new stuff. And difference isn't the difference Sam Quinones described. The subjective difference is more a note for drug connoisseurs. The real issue with this new shit is that its dirt cheap and everywhere.
 
negrogesic said:
L-meth isn't slightly more selective for NE than d-meth. It is tremendously more selective for NE, by an order of magnitude.

Make no mistake, 90:10 d-meth:l-meth is a potent, highly abusable stimulant. Functionally speaking, it isnt much different than d-meth. What makes it more likely to produce psychosis than the old pseudoephedrine based d-meth isn't so much pharmacodynamic differences but a function of economics: this new cartel meth is a fraction of the price, so users can take more, and sustain high dose daily habits far easier. That is what Sam Quinones missed. Instead he invented the P2P meth boogeyman.



It doesn't destabilize it, but it definitely does alter it. For those who have tried enantiomerically pure, pseudoephedrine based crystal meth, the difference is quite notable.

Beyond pharmacodymanics, probably of greater importance is that pharmacokinetically, l-methamphetamine, even at fairly low proportions, competes for absorption, distribution, and metabolic pathways, which can lower the effective concentration of d-methamphetamine in the brain, especially the all important time pharmacokinetic figure of time to peak plasma (which is a major component in the rewarding effect). The ultimate result is that the dopaminergic activity is not as pronounced as it would be with pure d-methamphetamine.

Also both enantiomers are metabolized by similar enzymatic pathways, so the presence of l-methamphetamine will slightly inhibit metabolism of d-methamphetamine due to competition for these enzymes, making it last a bit longer (similar to adderall, whereby l-amp alters d-amp pharmacokinetics compared to dextromethamphetamine alone). I suppose one could argue this could increase the risk of psychosis and neurotoxicity, but I'd say the difference is minor. The bigger difference is the high.

So in a sense, this new meth is slightly less reinforcing than pure d-meth. I know a long-term tweaker who actually quit because he didn't like the high of this stuff. For a new user smoking this new meth versus enantiomerically pure d-meth, they might be less impressed.

I remember trying this new breed of meth for the first time, when smoked i thought, "damn this stuff is not so great". Orally however, it is quite similar. This is because of the pharmacokinetic issue is more evened out.

So yeah, I agree Sam Quinones got it wrong about the P2P derived meth being somehow more toxic or addictive than pseudoephedrine based meth. But l-meth makes a difference. Intravenously it is probably is a bit worse for you given the potent local vasoconstriction that l-meth causes, and might be slightly more psychosis inducing since it hangs around longer, but the main reason people are losing their shit on it is is because how dirt cheap it has become, and how widely available it is.

I'm not a fan of meth, even the best d-meth, but there is a difference with this new stuff. And difference isn't the difference Sam Quinones described. The subjective difference is more a note for drug connoisseurs. The real issue with this new shit is that its dirt cheap and everywhere.
Click to expand...
Can you link some academic work or something that explains a bit on what you're saying here? I don't know if you're right or wrong but I've never heard anything to suggest that such little L-meth present would have any appreciable or significant impact on a high. I mean illicit meth began as racemic "crank" and although I don't get the opportunity to speak with a lot of old heads, most folks who were on the West Coast before Reagan scheduled P2P seem to have enjoyed crank meth.

I'll check my notes for what neurologists published the monoamine affinities, but my understanding was that L-meth only kindof is a better norepinephrine releasing agent than d-meth, but it feels like a nasty body high on its own because it barely releases dopamine so naturally the nasty anxiety feels more intense.

Personally for what it's worth I find vaped modern meth is fairly fiendishly addictive. It's no nicotine, but I never been carpet surfing for any other substance. Ofc I'm assuming unless 100% verified that I've never tried meth derived of pseudoephedrine.

Otherwise agreed with your first paragraph, that was my point entirely is that chemically speaking there's nothing about cartel meth that makes it more dangerous in terms of psychosis development. Norepinephrine can fuel actions taken on behalf of delusional thought processes, but most neurologists indicate dopamine and serotonin to be the drivers of psychosis.

Cartel meth is just cheap and readily available. Folks who could only buy a teenth a week can buy a Q oz now. Tons of younger people are using it in presses knowingly or seeking it out. And who knows what kind of changes long term fent and meth polydrug abuse may induce.


Not sayin you're wrong about L-meth btw. Just saying it doesn't compute to me based on what I know about the molecules, but I'm here to learn and that could be a big deal in explaining why some meth users believe meth has changed and typically DO remain consistent when I ask roughly what year they began to notice meth changing. Fascinating stuff, and I really want to have a theory that I can stand by to conclude that part of my book
 
Methamphetanonymous said:
"Super meth" is a term invented by an alleged journalist named Sam Quinones; who in my humble opinion is a total hack fraud with a bizarre angle of creating a narrative around meth and fentanyl: romanticizing of harmful addictive substances of the past being ruined by modern synthetic drugs. Fuckin kids these days, am I right?

Anyways I'm not going to link his trash piece in The Atlantic, or his other trash piece in an LA based magazine. Instead I will sum it up, he claims based on interviews with homeless meth users on Skid Row that modern meth is different. We've heard this shit before although it was referred to as "sleepy dope". But Quinones suggests this meth made by what he claims is a brand spankin new synthesis of methamphetamine using a synthetic chemical called phenylacetone or phenyl-2-propanone and subjected to reductive animation. Sam suggests based on literally nothing that P2P meth which he continues to refer to as "new" reduces users to secondary psychosis and societal hatred, violence, and debauchery nearly instantly unlike the old good party drug meth synthed from all natural plant alkaloids. P2P makes METH ZOMBIES. Hell yeah, America loves a good "drug of the week" turns folks into zombies narrative. Lets fucking GO. (This in fact was meths very first clandestine form before becoming "crystal meth". Essentially both substances are methamphetamine hydrochloride, but bikers didn't bother to make shards of meth as smoking crystaline hydrochloride salts wasn't even conceivable at the time. And yes, there is no evidence that one could not form large crystals from a racemic blend. The Hells Angels simply just didn't, probably due in part that nobody in the clandestine world expected the stabilized salt to be smokable. In the 60s and 70s you snorted or shot speed (Interesting again, once abuse proof methods of OTC meth inhalers began being used to deter folks from extracting meth similar to modern day propylhexedrine, users found that the freebase meth soaked papers in the inhalers remained active when injected). Later methamphetamine hydrochloride began being vaporized in pipes in Hawaii. I can elaborate on why methamphetamine is able to be smoked as a stabilized salt where other compounds like cocaine must be brought to their "freebase" state.)

So Sam Quinones just doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about. Neither do I, but I did some Googling, checked out books from my library, and made sure I had my history straight before putting pen to the paper. Anyways what Sam fails to mention is that modern methamphetamine is treated with a process the bikers either didn't have the care or freedom of law enforcement presence the cartel does to take the racemic yield of reductive animation, and purify it into 90% or more pure dextromethamphetamine, the more potent isomer of meth. (L-meth does basically nothing when paired with meth. L-meth is SLIGHTLY more selective of norepinephrine than D-meth, and has very much less affinity for dopamine than D-meth. But when paired together they both do in fact increase synaptic cleft concentrations of monoamines; dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine. Trace amounts of L-meth don't destabilize the subjective high of D-meth.)

Anyways, methamphetamine is kindof "super" in the sense that it is purer than ever, available for dirt cheap- the lowest street prices ever, and in MASSIVE quantities than a bunch of competing and inconsistent individual domestic chemists could not be capable of. This is entirely why users have negative subjective effects.

They're just overdosing on meth everytime they use it. They hit the bowl like it's weed and then panic fap for 20 hours before their body fails and forces sleep. Or worst case users develop symptoms of rhabdo.

Sam basically admits this in an interview when an almost responsible journalist pokes the same holes in his story. Nothing about modern meth is "new" or "different" chemically. D-meth is D-meth- whether your tweaker friends smurf up some cough pills and cook in a barn, or the cartel synths it through artificial means. It's just stronger, more available, and spreading WILDLY as amphetamine based stimulants are under a fucking shortage post COVID. New ADHD patients diagnosed by telehealth doctors, stupidly repeating the opioid epidemic catalyts, and now folks are discovering that meth is suddenly everywhere again.

Can't tell you how many fools on Reddit have now gotten their start on meth use as a substitute for their prescription stimulants.

I mean I did.

(My favorite part of the article is when Sam opines seemingly with sadness and regret that ALL NATURAL organic drugs like heroin and fucking pseudometh have been replaced by scary synthetics.

However more seriously his article only deepers the gap between the homeless- users of meth- and the rest of society that could have intercepted and re-routed them before it was too late. Fuck that guy.)
Click to expand...

negrogesic said:
L-meth isn't slightly more selective for NE than d-meth. It is tremendously more selective for NE, by an order of magnitude.

Make no mistake, 90:10 d-meth:l-meth is a potent, highly abusable stimulant. Functionally speaking, it isnt much different than d-meth. What makes it more likely to produce psychosis than the old pseudoephedrine based d-meth isn't so much pharmacodynamic differences but a function of economics: this new cartel meth is a fraction of the price, so users can take more, and sustain high dose daily habits far easier. That is what Sam Quinones missed. Instead he invented the P2P meth boogeyman.



It doesn't destabilize it, but it definitely does alter it. For those who have tried enantiomerically pure, pseudoephedrine based crystal meth, the difference is quite notable.

Beyond pharmacodymanics, probably of greater importance is that pharmacokinetically, l-methamphetamine, even at fairly low proportions, competes for absorption, distribution, and metabolic pathways, which can lower the effective concentration of d-methamphetamine in the brain, especially the all important time pharmacokinetic figure of time to peak plasma (which is a major component in the rewarding effect). The ultimate result is that the dopaminergic activity is not as pronounced as it would be with pure d-methamphetamine.

Also both enantiomers are metabolized by similar enzymatic pathways, so the presence of l-methamphetamine will slightly inhibit metabolism of d-methamphetamine due to competition for these enzymes, making it last a bit longer (similar to adderall, whereby l-amp alters d-amp pharmacokinetics compared to dextromethamphetamine alone). I suppose one could argue this could increase the risk of psychosis and neurotoxicity, but I'd say the difference is minor. The bigger difference is the high.

So in a sense, this new meth is slightly less reinforcing than pure d-meth. I know a long-term tweaker who actually quit because he didn't like the high of this stuff. For a new user smoking this new meth versus enantiomerically pure d-meth, they might be less impressed.

I remember trying this new breed of meth for the first time, when smoked i thought, "damn this stuff is not so great". Orally however, it is quite similar. This is because of the pharmacokinetic issue is more evened out.

So yeah, I agree Sam Quinones got it wrong about the P2P derived meth being somehow more toxic or addictive than pseudoephedrine based meth. But l-meth makes a difference. Intravenously it is probably is a bit worse for you given the potent local vasoconstriction that l-meth causes, and might be slightly more psychosis inducing since it hangs around longer, but the main reason people are losing their shit on it is is because how dirt cheap it has become, and how widely available it is.

I'm not a fan of meth, even the best d-meth, but there is a difference with this new stuff. And difference isn't the difference Sam Quinones described. The subjective difference is more a note for drug connoisseurs. The real issue with this new shit is that its dirt cheap and everywhere.
Click to expand...
I think it's worth noting that regardless of whether meth is different or not it:

A. Has not ever once been proven on a scientific basis, it is only through anecdotes that folks try to decide reasons for this phenomenon

And B. Regardless of the isomer makeup of meth the ultimate purpose of Sams article was to pivot away from media discussion suggesting the homelessness crisis is the result of insane housing to income disparity, and instead implies that an innocent and well employed person who for Gods sake just wants to buy a bump of meth and party at the club for the weekend (lol) suddenly will go insane and become homeless. He basically tells the reader than P2P meth and fentanyl coming from Mexico turns otherwise stable folks into homelessness.

Of course it doesn't take a genius to figure out that homelessness is kindof shitty, and makes people feel really shitty about their lives. So when the dealers drop by the tent town in the morning, a person who has lost everything and has nothing left to use is much more vulnerable to trying hard drugs than someone with a mortgage and car payments. I'm sure meth abuse has gotten out of control and dragged an addict into homelessness, but you can't blame the individual drug for that; you have to look at addiction as a illness and what the risk factors are that manifest it. Mental illness is a big one that enjoys disproportionately high numbers within both the homeless and the drug addicted populations of the USA.

Basically being homeless is a risk factor for addiction more so than an addiction is a risk factor for becoming homeless.
 
The guy who spit roasted you with words had it right. And, yeah, 'super meth' is just meth cooked fast and easy by cartels with precursors so close to actual meth that it just takes something as simple as adding a catalyst and like one other chemical. Just a term referring to highly pure meth that's being made at insanely fast rates and flooding streets everywhere.
 
daturetard said:
The guy who spit roasted you with words had it right. And, yeah, 'super meth' is just meth cooked fast and easy by cartels with precursors so close to actual meth that it just takes something as simple as adding a catalyst and like one other chemical. Just a term referring to highly pure meth that's being made at insanely fast rates and flooding streets everywhere.
Click to expand...
Did someone spit roast me? Or OP?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top