RCs 2-FDCK Sucks. Comparing to K & MXE

[Oreon]

I have been re-exploring the dissociative space once again. This time i decided to discover a new RC based on trusty Ketamine. It is the fluorinated analogies of the potent deschloroketamine. Unlike, DCK, 2-FDCK is less potent by weight, slightly. So what have I discovered something far?

2-FDCK is rubbish and the 5 grams I bought were a total waste of €100. As I have only used 0.15g so far, and only had bad experience. It is dogshit and dangerous and should not be used by anyone looking to try dissociatives for the first time, as they would have a horrid experince and be dissociated in dissociatives right off the bat.

Look, orginal DCK ain't great, but it is clean enough for a good anesthesia, w/solid trip & travels. It's 2-flourinated analogue 2-FDCK is worse, as is more sickening and less stable in terms of effects. Very shaky and wavy.and terribly unpleasant, as the whole high gets drowned by side-effects with no upside in sight regardless of dose.

2-FDCK needs be banned and taken off market as when I did 0.1g at once, had to go to ED (ER Dept) due to extreme side effects.

0/5 Stars, do not recommend.

Gotta say, I miss MXE, & Basic K.

Will be reviewing HXE (Hydroxetamine) & 2-Oxo-PCE soon, as both are decent compared to this 2-FDCK crap that ruined my day once again.

-O

13uFrHH973Cy67UZ38WGbVnQJgPtkomCxX

^Buy me a coffee if you like

 

[Oreon]

Okay, look. Now that I got the intial rant out of the way, I want to talk about the positives of 2-FDCK. Now I'm between the lines and terrible mashed side-effects with effects, I found gold of the 2-FDCK formula.

Unlike MXE and K, 2-FDCK has much stronger mu-opioid & k-opioid action. It also has noticeable anticholinergic action, more efficient than the other guys. Is over all very sedative providing a good night of sleep once you can fall asleep once side effects subside.

The reason I was so angry at 2-FDCK to begin with is because of my 2 intial experinces, the first one was terrible and led to a trip to hospital. This never happened to me with dissociatives, as I have always seen them as safest trippers that I could rely on. 2-FDCK is just too "effects on top of effects mashed toghther at once", it is not that good, but granted there is very good aspects and cool functions that I managed to point out from this compound. It is not feasible on it's own though.

O

 

[Chaurus]

I enjoyed 2-FDCK a few times, more than ketamine. But then I got bored and moved to O-PCE.

 

[Halif2]

Have you only tried the one batch of 2-fdck?

I've had a dozen or so different batches and never had anything close to what you described. I found it perfectly fine and very similar to regular ket. In some cases I actually enjoyed the 2-fdck a little more than ket - but I think it was mostly just down to mood and how it hit on a particular day. What I've used has been clean, however, and never shaky or dirty feeling. Weird.

The reason I was so angry at 2-FDCK to begin with is because of my 2 intial experinces, the first one was terrible and led to a trip to hospital.

Hang on... you used it and had an experience so bad that it led to you going to hospital, and then decided to use it again? From the same batch?! You absolute mad lad.

 

[Mjäll]

Unlike MXE and K, 2-FDCK has much stronger mu-opioid & k-opioid action. It also has noticeable anticholinergic action, more efficient than the other guys.

Source?

I thought it was alright btw, only tried it once

 

[4DQSAR]

Do I take this to be a homologue of ketamine in which the ortho chloro moiety has been exchanged for an ortho fluoro moiety?

I discussed the QASR with the fellow who developed MXE and we both wondered why Parke Davis who hold over 150 patents on the arylcyclohexylamine class of NMDA antagonist/DRI ligand only ever patented examples with a chloro and or an alkoxyl moiety on the aromatic ring. It seems such an obvious pathway for another pharmacutical company to patent a 'me too' drug.

Various amines are covered, but only those two ring substituents. Sometimes with both the 2-chloro and 5-alkoxy moieties.

Certainly CMXE was issued a GB patent which again is odd. Why would a US company only seek an overseas patent? We don't know but it MAY be the case that they wanted to obtain the patent BUT in the pre-internet days, it would be a patent unlikely to be noted. So if someone produced CMXE as an alternative to K, Parke Davis could either keep it tied up in court for years OR demand a fixed price for licencing the medication or a share of the profit if such a thing ever got a GSL.

But I think the interesting bit is that no other halogen or pseudohalogen was patented. Of course, we don't know if such ligands were made and tested but proved to have issues. No idea what, but that's normal - they don't publish articles on why a new drug doesn't work...